literal interpretation of bible + no evolution + noah's ark = ? - Page 10 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#271 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 06:36 PM
 
eilonwy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lost
Posts: 15,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
Hmmm.. if it is truly logic you are interested in, then you should have already read the Summa Theologica. No? You haven't? Then you can't claim to know much at all about LOGIC.
And that is it that makes you think I haven't read Summa Theologica? Oh yes, you don't know me at all. Hi, my name is Rynna, and I'm a geek. I'm also what they call a bibliophile, or "a voracious reader."

Rynna, Mama to Bean (8), Boobah (6), Bella (4) and Bear (2)
eilonwy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#272 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 06:36 PM
 
witchygrrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was almost a philosophy major in college...turned out I didn't want to continuously read the works of old, dead white men.

But I've read quite a bit of Catholic doctrine, both in and out of school (I attended Catholic school for several years). My school was run by those in Opus Dei, so VERY conservative Catholic viewpoints were the norm. And Creationism was NOT taught there. Evolution was.

I was raised Episcopalian. No Creationism there either. Inspired Word of God, perhaps, but inspired does not mean literal truth.

In a previous post, I mentioned that Jews do not literally believe in the Creation story, either. I married someone who was raised Jewish, and have many Jewish friends. They (my friends) think the creationists are nuts to have subverted their holy texts to mean such things.

When I was a believing Christian, many moons ago now, I believed that God touched off the Big Bang and watched over the process.

Come ponder with me about food!
witchygrrl is offline  
#273 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 07:00 PM - Thread Starter
 
jennica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
Now, if you just simply choose - obstinately - not even to entertain the idea that the Flood was indeed a global event, I cannot change your stubborn refusal. This would indicate to me that you have never read any of the many books that discuss the overwhelming geological and physical evidence of the global flood. At least I know what it's like to be on the other side and be an unbeliever and had spent my entire undergrad career being indoctrinated with the 'facts' of evolution.
I was "on the other side" for 31 years. I have only been on this side for 1 year. DH and I tried for years, by reading books like the ones you mentions here, to reconcile a belief in a global flood with science. Didn't work, we couldn't deny facts. We had to be intellectually honest with ourselves and admit that the only way that a global flood makes sense is if you presume that there was a global flood and then try to fit the "evidence" to that presumtion. If you just look at the natural world, you would never ever come to that conclusion.
jennica is offline  
#274 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 07:01 PM
 
~PurityLake~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anchorage, Alaska, US
Posts: 5,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by witchygrrl View Post
I was almost a philosophy major in college...turned out I didn't want to continuously read the works of old, dead white men.

Katreena, peace.gif 39 year old Alaskan treehugger.gif Mama to 1 hearts.gif and 1 lady.gif gd.gif
 
 
 
 

~PurityLake~ is offline  
#275 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 07:10 PM - Thread Starter
 
jennica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
What?? I never said anything at all about how many animals were on the Ark! Nor did I ever say anything about the number of animals on the Ark equalling the number os animals in the world today. That would violate all common sense. Animals die out, and man also has the capacity to breed all sorts of different varieties within the kinds of domesticated animals, and some wild ones in zoos. So, why would you ever expect to find the present day number of animals to equal that which rode upon the Ark?

I think you misunderstand my point.

The point I am making is all of the animals present today are a result of the animals that rode onthe Ark, and that has NOTHING to do with evolution. The process of breed proliferation is NOT the defined process of the theory of evolution.
Okay, well then we return to square one again.

Which animals were on the ark? There are too many species today to fit into the ark and be taken care of by only 8 people. There are more species of animals and fish than can even fit onto the ark.

Breeds are not species. Dogs are made up of breeds, horses are made up of breeds, but horses are not the same breed as donkey's or zebras. I'm talking SPECIES. NOT BREEDS. Lets be very clear on that. Species are animals that can not mate succesfully with each other. Kinds are not scientifically defined, but if we call them families, then kinds are animals that have some similarities with each other, but can't always interbreed! They are seperate species. By the bibles accounts I have come to the conclusion that a "kind" should be likened to a species. To liken them to "families" is wrong. Families can not interbreed, they are not the same kinds, and if a housecat turned into a bobcat and then into a lion and tiger in only 5000 years, that is evolution in an extreme form.

Please show me in the bible where "kind" is likened to "family" and not "species". I am curious to see where you came up with that definition in a biblical sense. Don't you consider the bible to be the utmost authority on the matter? So show me biblically what a kind is and how you came to that determination. Show me where other theoligians agree with you on this.
jennica is offline  
#276 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 07:14 PM - Thread Starter
 
jennica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
Why don't you do your own research?

Why have you not read even a single book on this topic?

Please answer these questions.
.
.
.
.
.
.


I have posted quotes and links to at least a half-dozen books now that have all of this information within their pages and you refuse to even look at one of them.

I'll be happy to keep posting more info for you on the topic of how the Flood worked (a VIOLENT event, BTW) after dinner, which I am sure you will continue NOT to read.
I have done my own research, otherwise how would I have come up with the information to leave my religion and start this thread?

Who wrote these books? Scientists? Biologists? What are their credentials? Why should I put more stock in them then in other materials that I have read on the subject?
jennica is offline  
#277 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 07:15 PM
 
StacyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Banned - period.
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by eilonwy View Post
Hi, my name is Rynna, and I'm a geek. I'm also what they call a bibliophile, or "a voracious reader."
Pleased to meet you - I am a bibliophile too!
StacyL is offline  
#278 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 07:17 PM
 
StacyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Banned - period.
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennica View Post
I have done my own research, otherwise how would I have come up with the information to leave my religion and start this thread?

Who wrote these books? Scientists? Biologists? What are their credentials? Why should I put more stock in them then in other materials that I have read on the subject?

Have you read a single of the half-dozen or so books on the topic I've listed in this thread?
StacyL is offline  
#279 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 07:51 PM
 
eilonwy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lost
Posts: 15,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
Have you read a single of the half-dozen or so books on the topic I've listed in this thread?
I've read some, and more recent books on the whole creationism argument as well. Guess what? Evolution still happened. Perhaps I'm just being obstinant or maybe my FIL is correct and I am too "cemented in sin" (his words) to ever see the light. : I've read the books, I've listened to the arguments... and they're sad, and clearly false as far as I can tell. You have to start from the wrong end, and as I said... false premises, by definition, lead to false conclusions.

Rynna, Mama to Bean (8), Boobah (6), Bella (4) and Bear (2)
eilonwy is offline  
#280 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 08:43 PM
 
Pynki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Inside the café au lait
Posts: 7,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
Yes, that is straight out of Jesus' mouth in the Gospels. I mean, it really is an either/or selection - it's not mulitple choice. I'm sorry - I had nothing to do with it being set up that way.
Ok, and this one should really floor you... I'm NOT against God, or Jesus... a good many of their "followers" perhaps, but not the Big Three of Christianity themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
Unfortunately, the evolution/creation argument goes straight to the heart of this separation of those who are "with God" and those who are "against Him."
And this once again is just untrue. It's a very narrow view of God and religion. It's like looking through the keyhole and saying you can see the whole room. You may THINK you can see the whole room because you've never actually been inside of it before, but what you are missing is more than 5x's what you can see.

It's lonely being the only XX in a house of XYs.
Pynki is offline  
#281 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 09:08 PM
 
l_olive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thao View Post
I_olive, I was a fundamentalist Christian for over half my life so I understand the mindset.

It's not that they feel threatened (or at least I didn't) but rather a conviction that there is only One Truth which naturally enough happens to be their particular belief. If there is only one truth, and they have it, then obviously anything different is wrong. Add to that a belief in Satan who is trying to deceive people so they'll go to Hell. So evolution is a plot by Satan to lead people away from God. All other religions and religous experiences are nothing more than counterfeits created by Satan.

I don't quite know how to explain this, but to maintain this pretty simplistic worldview in such a complicated world, one has to impose it on EVERYTHING. If something comes up that doesn't fit with the worldview, one has to disbelieve it. So for example when a fundamentalist meets someone like me who is no longer a Christian and very happy with my situation (when I should be miserable and convicted), they'll think to themselves (or sometimes tell me outright) that really truly deep inside I know the truth, and I am just resisting it because I don't want to abide by God's laws/am selfish/being deceived by Satan etc. I could tell them until I am blue in the face that this is not the case and they won't hear it.

Oh, I suppose for those that believe the Bible is inerrant and literally true there could be an element of feeling threatened. Because if any jot or tittle turns out to not be true, it will shake their entire faith. I remember as a high-schooler frantically trying to make the various geneologies in the Bible match up with each other, because if those were wrong then I would lose my faith.

I have to say, after participating in this thread I am so glad I am no longer a part of that. It's great for some people, but not for me.
Thank you, Thao, for your thoughtful reply to my question. I have to admit, though, that the whole mindset is so foreign to me that I'm not sure I'll ever quite understand it.

This thread makes me glad, too -- glad that I've never felt it necessary to denegrate anyone else's beliefs in order to preserve my own. Because it would, indeed, be hard for me to reconcile my moral and religious convictions with a kind of Christianity which required its members to be arrogant and narrow-minded.
l_olive is offline  
#282 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 11:20 PM
 
Thao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Washington state
Posts: 2,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
No one? I did.

Haven't read the books?! I spent four years of college reading those books! Are you kidding me? :

I am not the only former evolutionist who abandoned this false theory. Are you purposely ignoring the George Gaylord Simpson quotes I posted?
You've misunderstood once again.

I was referring to the books you've talked about on the Flood. Your opinion seems to be (correct me if I'm wrong) that anyone who reads those books will either believe in the Flood or they are being obstinate. It doesn't allow for the option that someone might read the books on the Flood and decide the evidence presented therein is not persuasive.
Thao is offline  
#283 of 294 Old 08-22-2007, 11:37 PM
 
Thao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Washington state
Posts: 2,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
I don't see why you are so coy about your beliefs. It's not supposed to be a 'secret.' I am quite open with mine, and you have judged and mocked me and personally it has no impact.
It has never been intention to judge you or mock you Stacy. I think you'd have a hard time fnding a post of mine that did that. Nonetheless, I apologize if I did.

As for being "coy" about my beliefs, why would I share something that is so personal to me with someone who will not respect what I have to say? You'll just tell me I'm being "obstinate" .
Thao is offline  
#284 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 12:50 AM
 
eilonwy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lost
Posts: 15,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thao View Post
It doesn't allow for the option that someone might read the books on the Flood and decide the evidence presented therein is not persuasive.
To be honest, this is the thing about most fundamentalist sorts which really drives me bonkers. There's this idea that if I'd actually read the books, I'd believe them. I remember that it came up over and over again in the Left Behind books, too-- the idea that the only possible outcome of thorough study was theirs. Which is sad... because in my experience, the exact opposite is true.

I've said it more than once. I've read the books. I still disagree. In fact, reading the books only gives me more to disagree *with*. Must be the sin cement...

Rynna, Mama to Bean (8), Boobah (6), Bella (4) and Bear (2)
eilonwy is offline  
#285 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 12:51 PM
 
witchygrrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by eilonwy View Post
To be honest, this is the thing about most fundamentalist sorts which really drives me bonkers. There's this idea that if I'd actually read the books, I'd believe them. I remember that it came up over and over again in the Left Behind books, too-- the idea that the only possible outcome of thorough study was theirs. Which is sad... because in my experience, the exact opposite is true.

I've said it more than once. I've read the books. I still disagree. In fact, reading the books only gives me more to disagree *with*. Must be the sin cement...
Yeah, I was always too much of a free thinker to be a real fundamentalist/evangelical of any sort. I can't just read a book and fall for the bait, hook, line, and sinker.

And I don't understand what's so wrong about a story being an allegory? Why does the Bible, with all of its inconsistencies, have to be taken as literal truth in order to be God's Word? Religions have had myths since time began to teach spiritual truths, and cultures have had folklore to inspire their peoples. The Dalai Lama, whom I deeply admire, makes an effort to learn about the universe. An ancient Buddhist teaching said that the moon and the sun are equidistant from the earth. But the Dalai Lama was shown by astronomers with their telescope that this is simply not true in the literal sense. So he was convinced, and he said that maybe that teaching ought to be changed so people will know the scientific truth.

Come ponder with me about food!
witchygrrl is offline  
#286 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 01:25 PM - Thread Starter
 
jennica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
Have you read a single of the half-dozen or so books on the topic I've listed in this thread?
I've heard of the books and I am familiar with the arguments they present. I used to try to convince myself of those arguments, but I no longer believe that they are possible. Again, I ask you, who wrote these books? Scientists, biologists? What are their credentials? Why are their opinions more important than other materials I have read? What is the magical point in the books that will change my mind now? Why don't you just share that here right now on this thread and save us all some time. Telling us to go read books instead of answering simple questions about a theory you believe in is just showing me that you don't have enough of a grasp on the topic to present your side. The evolutionists have no problem answering simple questions about their theory. They don't keep pointing me to books, and saying that I wont understand their side unless I read these certain books. If you can't explain something to someone then you don't really understand it.
jennica is offline  
#287 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 02:30 PM
 
Thao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Washington state
Posts: 2,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
I am not the only former evolutionist who abandoned this false theory. Are you purposely ignoring the George Gaylord Simpson quotes I posted?
I was just re-reading this thread and caught this, I guess I missed it the first time around.

The quote is: "The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium (Eohippus) into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook wirters, never happened in nature."

Except that he was not saying that because he had abandoned evolutionary theory. He was saying it because he disagreed with the idea that evolution happens uniformly, in a straight line, and instead proposed a model with a lot of branches and dead-ends branching out from a "trunk".

Quote:
Simpson made the evolution of the horse one of his specialties; his detailed, quantitative studies, published in his classic book Horses (1951), exploded Marsh's "single-line" evolution of the horse from a fox-sized hoofless ancestor. Instead, Simpson showed the complex and diverse branching of the horse's ancient relatives, not only through time, but over geographica area, as early populations pushed into various habitats, adapting first to forests, then to open grasslands. Horses represented a complex, branching bush of diverging species—nothing like a line leading straight from Eohippus to old Dobbin.
He went to his grave still believing in that "false theory", Stacy. If it was one of your books that gave you your quote and told you he rejected evolutionary theory, you should question the scholarship of the book to have made such an error.

I am also curious how, given your 4 years of study of biology and evolution and your commitment to doing research, you could not have known that that quote was so badly taken out of context? Did you not research that quote before posting it?
Thao is offline  
#288 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 03:52 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: crazy with Vertigo
Posts: 2,247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by merpk View Post
Okay, so no one is reading my link, but will give it over in very brief ... it's not a poetic thing, each day. Remembering that the universe started in one small point, the Big Bang, whammo, it's expanding outward, right? so as it expands, time is perceived differently ... and the time as perceived in the first large chunk is perceived differently in the second, and continuing in the third ... etc., etc., etc.


I never took physics in school, so don't take my word for it. Read my links.



just meandering though but i HAD to respond to this...

I thought I was the only one who thought this... back in college I realized how much faster time seemed to go than when I was a child. I was also taking a class on statistics and somehow cam eto the conclusion that days were going faster, because of my perspective. As you get older each moment that passes is a smaller percentage of your total life... a day is less time from the perspective of someone who has lived through two decades than someone who has lived one, etc.

anyway, OT, but it was cool to read those link. i cannot wait to show them to DH. he LOVES this kind of stuff. Thanks for posting!

Black Orchid is offline  
#289 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 07:03 PM
 
StacyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Banned - period.
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hi all - I am sorry to say I have had a very unfortunate family emergency happen today and am having to put me and kids on a plane first thing Saturday morning. I will try to check in as I am able.
StacyL is offline  
#290 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 10:55 PM
 
StacyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Banned - period.
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just stumbled across this very interesting quote and thought it was good timing:

"The guiding spirit of modern science, according to the Faust myth, is a satanic demon.... How seriously do we need to take the idea that our whole society and civilization is under the possession of such a spirit, worshiped through money and power? How much are fallen angels actually guiding and perverting the progress of science and technology? Is a great war between the good and evil angels being acted out on Earth? We hardly know how to think or talk about such possibilities since they are so alien to the official, standard models of Western history."

- Rupert Sheldrake, in Chaos, Creativity, and Cosmic Consciousness
StacyL is offline  
#291 of 294 Old 08-23-2007, 11:28 PM
 
Thao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Washington state
Posts: 2,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I hope everyone in your family is okay, Stacy!
Thao is offline  
#292 of 294 Old 08-24-2007, 11:02 AM
 
suzywan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 711
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I've been reading along though not responding because I really don't have much to say - the topic isn't my thing, so to speak.

But, I hope that everything is OK with your family, Stacey - you are in my thoughts and prayers

me, my man, and our boys (1/08 and 3/11)
 

suzywan is online now  
#293 of 294 Old 08-24-2007, 11:05 AM
 
StacyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Banned - period.
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yeah, my Dad has Alzheimer's and I have to make an emergency trip to AZ (I'm in MD) - it just stinks.
StacyL is offline  
#294 of 294 Old 08-24-2007, 02:13 PM
 
witchygrrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm sorry about your father, StacyL...chronic illness, particularly the Alzheimer's and related diseases are not easy to handle.

But I did want to comment on your quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by StacyL View Post
I just stumbled across this very interesting quote and thought it was good timing:

"The guiding spirit of modern science, according to the Faust myth, is a satanic demon.... How seriously do we need to take the idea that our whole society and civilization is under the possession of such a spirit, worshiped through money and power? How much are fallen angels actually guiding and perverting the progress of science and technology? Is a great war between the good and evil angels being acted out on Earth? We hardly know how to think or talk about such possibilities since they are so alien to the official, standard models of Western history."

- Rupert Sheldrake, in Chaos, Creativity, and Cosmic Consciousness
Rupert Sheldrake is currently studying animal telepathy and other paranormal phenomena. I'm not saying I doubt this stuff. But I wouldn't imagine this to be really in-line with orthodox Christianity or Creationism. He also criticizes Darwinism and Neo-Darwinism, but in that he believes that acquired characteristics can be passed down. He also believes in the laws of nature being more like habits, that they too evolve as the universe changes.

This is not to say I'm not intrigued by his ideas as they are unorthodox in the modern sense (he would seem to prefer a return to Platonic and Aristotlean ideas tested in the scientific methods of today, and that we need to accept the presence of metanatural forces). But again, I don't see how this truly supports your viewpoint.

More can be found at www.sheldrake.org

Come ponder with me about food!
witchygrrl is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off