I know the Bible doesn't explicitly say any of this but, purely hypothetically, IF the Bible DID explicitly say that the Earth is millions of years old and DID explicitly say abiogenesis happened and DID explicitly say life and humans evolved by Darwinian evolution and DID explicitly say we and all other life share a common ancestor and DID explicitly say the Big Bang theory is correct, would you THEN accept the said scientific evidence for evolution and old-Earth etc as being valid evidence?
-because, if the answer is “yes”, then that shows that the ONLY real reason why you reject the said evidence as valid/real evidence is what the Bible says and NOT because of logic/reason and that would also mean the whole premise that the said evidence is not valid/real rests on the assumption that the Bible always tells the truth. But that assumption that the Bible always tells the truth cannot be falsified because, if that assumption is false, you still could always just simply dismiss any evidence that it is false by saying that said evidence is not valid/real evidence because the Bible always tells the truth!
The problem, of course, this reasoning is circular; -what if the Bible does NOT always tell the truth? and how do you KNOW that the Bible always tells the truth?
Originally posted by humy I know the Bible doesn't explicitly say any of this but, purely hypothetically, [b]IF the Bible DID explicitly say that the Earth is millions of years old and DID explicitly say abiogenesis happened and DID explicitly say life and humans evolved by Darwinian evolution and DID explicitly say we and all other life share a common ancestor and DID explicitly say th ...[text shortened]... does NOT always tell the truth? and how do you KNOW that the Bible always tells the truth?[/b]
For the Christian, the Bible always tells the truth. That should answer all the questions in your post. However not all Christians interpret the account of creation the same way. Some like myself acknowledge that it cannot be possible to explain how God created life in a few short chapters, and that science has some answers which cannot be ignored. There is a lot still to be discovered.
What a superbly well thought out and clear question! And kudos for posting the logical conclusion from an affirmative answer instead of trying to drag them into a hidden trap.
I would be very interested in an honest and thoughtful answer from the likes of RJHinds et al. I'd love to know how they approach this.
Originally posted by Rajk999 For the Christian, the Bible always tells the truth. That should answer all the questions in your post. However not all Christians interpret the account of creation the same way. Some like myself acknowledge that it cannot be possible to explain how God created life in a few short chapters, and that science has some answers which cannot be ignored. There is a lot still to be discovered.
For the Christian, the Bible always tells the truth. That should answer all the questions in your post.
Does that mean you would claim that the answer to my long first question that I highlighted in bold-type is "yes"?
Then, if you are right, the Christians ( well, only the Creationist ones that also deny scientific evidence ) will fall into the trap I explained after that long question.
Originally posted by humy Then, if you are right, the Christians ( well, only the Creationist ones that also deny scientific evidence ) will fall into the trap I explained after that long question.
Trap? That creationists dismiss scientific evidence with [edit: out ] proof?
Is it your opinion that Christians should be interested in logic and reason?
Originally posted by Rajk999 Trap? That creationists dismiss scientific evidence with proof?
Is it your opinion that Christians should be interested in logic and reason?
Trap? That creationists dismiss scientific evidence with proof?
don't you mean “without proof”? Unless you mean that what the Bible says IS the proof because “the Bible always tells the truth”? -somehow I don't think this is what you meant.
Is it your opinion that Christians should be interested in logic and reason?
they “should” be if they are rational about this. The question is, ARE they rational about this? -I will just have to wait to see how they answer my questions.
Trap? That creationists dismiss scientific evidence with proof?
don't you mean “without proof”? Unless you mean that the Bible says IS the proof because “the Bible always tells the truth”? -somehow I don't think this is what you meant.
Is it your opinion that Christians should be interested in logic and reason?
they “shoul ...[text shortened]... , ARE they rational about this? -I will just have to wait to see how they answer my questions.
Yes .. 'without'.
Logic and proof is sometimes not compatible with religious beliefs.
Originally posted by humy Yes, and I think that is true for all four of the possible meanings of the word "SHOULD" i.e. true for all four kinds of should.
Rationality and biblical following are diametrically opposed. There is not much middle ground in those two topics. So RJ would believe it only if it specifically says so in the bible.
Forgetting that the bible is just a compilation of stories put together in the council of Nicea around the year 350 or so and there were many other volumes rejected so his believing in a strict interpretation of the bible is just another way of saying he agrees with the assessment of men, not his god. A lot of the rejected volumes were in the Gnostic bible, and that was a result of political divisions in the church as it was back then.
Originally posted by humy Yes, and I think that is true for all four of the possible meanings of the word "SHOULD" i.e. true for all four kinds of should.
All people should be interested in being logical and rational all the time. Unfortunately that is not the case .. not even for you Im sure.
Originally posted by humy I know the Bible doesn't explicitly say any of this but, purely hypothetically, [b]IF the Bible DID explicitly say that the Earth is millions of years old and DID explicitly say abiogenesis happened and DID explicitly say life and humans evolved by Darwinian evolution and DID explicitly say we and all other life share a common ancestor and DID explicitly say th ...[text shortened]... ible does NOT always tell the truth? and how do you KNOW that the Bible always tells the truth?
Your question has no validity, because the Holy Bible deals with truth and not hypothetical lies. Faith and belief is not void of reason and logic as you mistakenly believe. HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord!
Question for RJHinds and other Creationists that deny evidence
29 May '12 11:469 edits
Back to Top