1. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    29 May '12 11:469 edits
    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?
  2. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    29 May '12 12:241 edit
    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.
  3. Joined
    01 Jun '06
    Moves
    274
    29 May '12 12:24
    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.

    --- Penguin
  4. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    29 May '12 12:36
    Originally posted by Rajk999
    For the Christian, the Bible always tells the truth.
    Only for True Christians®.
    There are many Christians who do not believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God.
  5. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    29 May '12 12:403 edits
    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"?
  6. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    29 May '12 12:43
    Originally posted by humy

    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"?
    Thats correct
  7. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    29 May '12 12:502 edits
    Originally posted by Rajk999
    Thats correct
    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.
  8. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    29 May '12 12:551 edit
    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?
  9. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    29 May '12 13:032 edits
    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.
  10. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    29 May '12 13:08
    Originally posted by humy
    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.

    Im interested in seeing responses as well 🙂
  11. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    29 May '12 13:25
    Originally posted by Rajk999
    Trap? That creationists dismiss scientific evidence with [edit: out ] proof?

    Is it your opinion that Christians should be interested in logic and reason?
    humans SHOULD be interested in logic and reason.
  12. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    29 May '12 15:311 edit
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    humans SHOULD be interested in logic and reason.
    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.
  13. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    29 May '12 15:47
    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.
  14. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    29 May '12 16:52
    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.
  15. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    30 May '12 01:31
    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!
Back to Top