MERGED -> Bush endorses 'intelligent design' + Politicized Scholars... - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-06-2005, 05:13 AM   #151
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by jphelmet
So the Gospel of Luke, when He says I am writing an orderly account of the things that happened, so you can know for certain...
He wasn't making a claim that he was writing a historical document?
Without going to far into it, if the gospels are stories made up, for the purpose of trying to start a religion (vs. being an historical account of what happened) than it is the single greatest work of fiction or (i think you could even say) literature ever.
The gospels would then be a "realistic fiction" - a genre that had never existed up to that time, and would not be seen again for about 1500 years. Fascinating, that a tax-man, doctor, and a couple of fisherman came up with a whole new genre (that then vanished for 1500 years), everyone of the followers at the time (who could have fact-checked this wonderful fairy tale) said it's cool- i'll just believe it and suffer horrendous persecution for a completely fictious story.

I would ask you this, to whom do you believe Luke was writing to, and why?

So you believe the writers of the Gospel, were writing a historical account. I do not. PLease note, however, I NEVER said they wrote a work of fiction. They were each writing for their own purpose, not a book of history in my opinion. The Gospels were not written for the purpose of starting their own religion. They still thought of themselves as Jews in the beginning.

There are inconsistencies betwewen the Gospels.

I never said the stories were false. There is a difference between writing for history and writing fiction. I do not claim it to be fiction. I claim it not to be writen for complete and total historical accuracy.

Please note I said the Bible...the entire book itself.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 05:43 AM   #152
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 11:18 PM
Honestly, the descriptions of what this book is, are as vague as the book itself. They're not accurate. They God inspired. Directed By God. Accurate accounts of those involved. Time is irrelevant and meaningless, therefore nothing can be gleamed from that. They're false. They're historical docments, as recorded at the time.

And that's not even getting into Jesus walking on water, feeding a crowd with a few lousy fish and some stale bread. Doing the work of an opthalmologist and making a blind man see. Doing that of an orthopaedic surgeon and making a crippled man walk. Adam and Eve and Downs Syndrome.
__________________

__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 06:47 AM   #153
Refugee
 
stammer476's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,058
Local Time: 09:18 PM
So are we in agreement, then, that in the public school science classroom there should be no mention of, or lend no possibility to, a Creator/Higher Power?
__________________
stammer476 is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 08:39 AM   #154
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
I said that what I don't want is them teaching macroevolution in mankind as if it as if it were a foregone conlcusion that it was factual.
Which, in essence, is done when you intentionally exclude alternative theories to evolution.

The textbook for ID is not the Book of Genesis.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 08:45 AM   #155
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem
Honestly, the descriptions of what this book is, are as vague as the book itself. They're not accurate. They God inspired. Directed By God. Accurate accounts of those involved. Time is irrelevant and meaningless, therefore nothing can be gleamed from that. They're false. They're historical docments, as recorded at the time.

And that's not even getting into Jesus walking on water, feeding a crowd with a few lousy fish and some stale bread. Doing the work of an opthalmologist and making a blind man see. Doing that of an orthopaedic surgeon and making a crippled man walk. Adam and Eve and Downs Syndrome.
Downs Syndrome? What in the world are talking about?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 08:48 AM   #156
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
How is it not factual? we have the mitochondrial DNA evidence that demonstrates human migration and has shown the variation between Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals, and we can see the Homo genus in the fossil record, other linneages that are now extinct
Isn't macroevolution basically defined as one specied evolving into a separate species? If so, what evidence is there of that?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 09:15 AM   #157
Refugee
 
jphelmet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: cumming, ga usa
Posts: 1,387
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


It's not ethnocentric at all. Rabbis would not have memorized the New Testament, because they did not believe it. Likewise, early Christianity was disorganized in the early years, and it's very "convenient" that the New Testament texts all date after A.D. 70--the destruction of Jerusalem--where both the apostles and Paul would be dead. As such, we are dealing with third person texts masquerading as "first person." And there is already ample evidence that the Book of Matthew was riddled with "corrections" to make it conform to Gentile Christian theology.

Likewise, you find the same POV differences between the Pharisees' OT canon versus the Essenes' OT canon (Dead Sea Scrolls). And as for the OT canon itself, it was only formalized in the first century A.D. by the Pharisees and, even then, there's plenty of medieval Jewish scriptures that rip into its accuracy; hence, we have the Talmud.

So if you're trying to tell me that the people of 2000-3000 years ago didn't have prejudices and biases like we do today, I'll have to disagree.

Melon
Your missing the point. You made the comparison to writing things down today many years after they happen. That is not an accurate or fair comparison. In our culture we put little to no emphasis on transmitting accurate oral traditions, or memorization- in that time there was great emphasis and very common. The point about rabbis, was simply this was common in the culture, and example of memorization. Many Christians were Jewish, and you honestly believe there were no rabbis who became followers of Christ? That is why I said it is a very ethno centric argument.

Many dates of the N.T. text do not date after 70 A.D. The epsitles date from 48-64 AD, and the latest possible datings for the gospels is 70-90's AD. many scholars date them in the 40's-70's. to your claim that all the apostles and Paul were dead in 70 AD, there is evidence that the apostle John was alive in the 90's AD (From extra-biblical sources).
__________________
jphelmet is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 09:15 AM   #158
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
Isn't macroevolution basically defined as one specied evolving into a separate species? If so, what evidence is there of that?
The Island of Galapagos. And, in fact, any isolated island. Isolated areas speed up the process of evolution, whereas wide open spaces with lots of diversity of genetics slow down greatly.

And the existence of Helacyton gartleri, whose speciation occurred naturally as the result of human cervix cells being infected with HPV and causing cancer for a woman in the 1950s created a self-sustaining, single celled organism that also happens to be immortal. This did not occur as the result of genetic engineering or scientific interference, but solely through nature.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 09:23 AM   #159
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by jphelmet
Many Christians were Jewish, and you honestly believe there were no rabbis who became followers of Christ? That is why I said it is a very ethno centric argument.
I still disagree. Play a game of telephone some time, and go through enough generations. If you're really good at it, you'll get the jist of it accurate, but the details will be muddled. Again, compare the canonical OT to the Dead Sea Scrolls and you'll find similar discrepancies where the main idea is correct, but the details are different. I very much wish the Biblical texts of the Sadducees were still around, because I'm sure they'd be completely different too, particularly considering their disgust with Messianic theology.

Quote:
Many dates of the N.T. text do not date after 70 A.D. The epsitles date from 48-64 AD, and the latest possible datings for the gospels is 70-90's AD. many scholars date them in the 40's-70's. to your claim that all the apostles and Paul were dead in 70 AD, there is evidence that the apostle John was alive in the 90's AD (From extra-biblical sources).
Have you happened to ever look at the history of how the NT evolved? It was not a short and painless process, and was spread over close to 300 years. I plain cannot and do not believe that this book is perfectly made and infallible. In fact, not even my Catholic school education taught me that it was infallible.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 09:29 AM   #160
Refugee
 
jphelmet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: cumming, ga usa
Posts: 1,387
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox



I would ask you this, to whom do you believe Luke was writing to, and why?

So you believe the writers of the Gospel, were writing a historical account. I do not. PLease note, however, I NEVER said they wrote a work of fiction. They were each writing for their own purpose, not a book of history in my opinion. The Gospels were not written for the purpose of starting their own religion. They still thought of themselves as Jews in the beginning.

There are inconsistencies betwewen the Gospels.

I never said the stories were false. There is a difference between writing for history and writing fiction. I do not claim it to be fiction. I claim it not to be writen for complete and total historical accuracy.

Please note I said the Bible...the entire book itself.
Luke was writing to Theophilus, a high ranking, upper class Roman official. He says why in the first part of Luke 1:1-4
" Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. "

So what do you believe Luke's own prupose was? Why was writing this well ordered account, where He was interviewing eyewitnesses? I am not trying to be attacking about this, but just curious of your explanation. If it is not fiction, and they were not trying to be totally accurate, then what is it? Or are you saying they were trying to be accurate but just couldn't do it?

I agree with you about not trying to start a religion, and still thinking themselves as Jews. They beleived that this was the logical progression in Judaism. They believed the Messiah predicted had come.

There are parts of the Bible that are figurative, and not straight historical narrative- but you said the whole Bible (which includes the synoptic gospels, acts, etc) was not trying to be historical.
__________________
jphelmet is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 09:44 AM   #161
Refugee
 
jphelmet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: cumming, ga usa
Posts: 1,387
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


I still disagree. Play a game of telephone some time, and go through enough generations. If you're really good at it, you'll get the jist of it accurate, but the details will be muddled. Again, compare the canonical OT to the Dead Sea Scrolls and you'll find similar discrepancies where the main idea is correct, but the details are different. I very much wish the Biblical texts of the Sadducees were still around, because I'm sure they'd be completely different too, particularly considering their disgust with Messianic theology.


Melon
The Sadducess only recognized the authority of the written Law, but not the prophetic books or other writings in the O.T., or in resurrection- so there disgust of messianic theology is expected to a degree.

Melon while I do disagree with you on a lot of things, I appreciate your answers and perspective. There have times, I am not sure what you are alluding to or what your perspective is, and it has made me stop and make sure I understand my own arguments and beliefs. Its refreshing to have someone who will not just say something they have heard second hand without ever bothering to investigate it (which is very much the case many times-esp. around here). I think there are too many Christian who will totally dismiss a lot of arguments and not at least look at the other side of an argument- choosing blind acceptance which I think hurts the churches credibility. For me, it helps to solidify what I believe.

In answer to your other questions pertaining the canonization of the NT, yes I have studied it and am still currently doing so. I still believe that it is plausible that the NT is reliable.
__________________
jphelmet is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 12:30 PM   #162
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Which, in essence, is done when you intentionally exclude alternative theories to evolution.

The textbook for ID is not the Book of Genesis.
So how do we decide what alternative theories should be included. I suppose this links into the point I made earlier in this thread - that it's very easy for people who believe in ID to advocate it being taught in public schools, but I suspect they would feel differently if teaching a theory based on a religion other than their own was proposed.
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 06:34 PM   #163
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by jphelmet
So what do you believe Luke's own prupose was? Why was writing this well ordered account, where He was interviewing eyewitnesses? I am not trying to be attacking about this, but just curious of your explanation. If it is not fiction, and they were not trying to be totally accurate, then what is it? Or are you saying they were trying to be accurate but just couldn't do it?


There are parts of the Bible that are figurative, and not straight historical narrative- but you said the whole Bible (which includes the synoptic gospels, acts, etc) was not trying to be historical.
#1 I subscribe the the belief that he was writing to the Roman Appointed High Priest.

#2 I believe Luke still viewed himself as a Jew, and it was important to him to demonstrate that Christ was not in contradiciton to the Jewish faith. I believe that that is what the Gospel of Luke is, a defense of Christ to a high ranking Roman appointed Jew. Not intended to be the perfect blow by blow account of every minute of every day of Christ's life and ministry.

#3 I do not believe it to be fiction in the sense that it is made up. I believe it to be written to be as accurate as possible, but it was not writen as a historical account, meaning accurate to the minute. Did the things in the story happen, yes. Were they described in a historically accurate, date time place minute, I sincerely doubt it.

#4 Again, having spent the entire last year studying the Old Testament, I do not believe the Bible to be a "History Book" nor in relevance to this thread, a book of "Science".
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-06-2005, 07:55 PM   #164
Refugee
 
jphelmet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: cumming, ga usa
Posts: 1,387
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


#3 I do not believe it to be fiction in the sense that it is made up. I believe it to be written to be as accurate as possible, but it was not writen as a historical account, meaning accurate to the minute. Did the things in the story happen, yes. Were they described in a historically accurate, date time place minute, I sincerely doubt it.

Your missing an important distinction about writing history at this time. Your argument is very much limited by our perspective in this era. This is what a history looks like written in the 1st century. At this time writing an historical account is not what it is today. They were not concerned with exact time and minute. This is not a fair criteria for if it was meant to be an accurate history. By your criteria there is no history written in the 1st century. They were as You say "written to be as accurate as possible" - that is what an historical account is.
__________________
jphelmet is offline  
Old 08-07-2005, 03:42 AM   #165
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 11:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Downs Syndrome? What in the world are talking about?

All of us coming from two people only.
__________________

__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com