Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
Title: Evolution or Creation Science?
Source:
Orthodox Church in America
URL Source: https://oca.org/reflections/fr.-law ... /evolution-or-creation-science
Published: May 30, 2012
Author: Fr. Lawrence Farley
Post Date: 2018-02-14 09:59:32 by A Pole
Keywords: orthodox, creation, evolution
Views: 18081
Comments: 211
In my years as a priest and of sharing the Gospel, I have heard many reasons offered for not becoming a Christian: scandals associated with clergy, the wealth of the Church, the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc. etc. I thought I had more or less heard it all, and so was unprepared for a reason one young man offered to justify his rejection of Orthodoxy—namely, that dinosaurs were not in the Bible. I blinked a few times, and was left temporarily speechless (something of a rarity with me, to which those who know me well can attest). His idea was that since dinosaurs obviously existed (their skeletons adorn our museums), then if the Bible was God’s Word, he should be able to read about dinosaurs in the Bible. Since he could not find them there (I refrained from mentioning certain fundamentalist interpretations of Leviathan and Behemoth in the Book of Job), then obviously the Bible could not be God’s Word and he could not remain Orthodox. He was referring of course to the old supposed conflict between Science and Religion, and in this arm-wrestling match, it was clear to him that Science had won. No Biblical dinosaurs, no more church-going. So, what’s the deal about dinosaurs? Why aren’t they in the creation stories in Genesis? Apart from the absurdity of supposing they’re not there because they aren’t mentioned by name (the duck-billed platypus isn’t mentioned by name either), it’s a valid question, and one that leads us headlong into the question of how to interpret the early chapters of Genesis. Interpretation of the creation stories too often degenerates into an argument between the theory of evolution vs. what is sometimes called “creation science”. By “evolution” the average non-scientific person means the notion that Man descended from the apes, or from a common ancestor of apes and men. The name “Darwin” is usually thrown about, regardless of how the ideas in his On the Origin of Species have fared in the scientific community since Darwin wrote it in 1859, and most people’s knowledge of evolution is confined to looking at the famous evolutionary chart in National Geographic, showing how smaller hominids kept walking until they became human beings like us. By “creation science” is meant the view that the Genesis stories are to be taken as scientifically or historically factual, so that the earth (often considered to be comparatively young) was created by God in six twenty-four hour days. Since the time of the “Scopes monkey trial”, the argument between “evolutionists” and “creationists” has been going strong, and is often fought in the nation’s courts and departments of education. Arm-wrestling indeed. Happily for people with weak arms like myself, the Church does not call us to take part in this arm-wrestling match. The creation stories in Genesis were not written, I suggest, to give us a blow-by-blow account of how we got here. Rather, they were written to reveal something fundamental about the God of Israel and the privileged status of the people who worshipped Him. We assume today that the ancients wanted to know how we got here, and how we were created. In fact, they were mostly uninterested in such cosmic questions, and the creation myths that existed in the ancient near east spoke to other issues. Most people back then, if they thought of the question of cosmic origins at all, assumed that the world had always existed, and the various gods they worshipped were simply part of that eternal backdrop. That is where the creation stories were truly revolutionary. Their main point was not merely that God created the world; it was that the tribal God of the Jewish people was sovereign over the world. We take monotheism for granted, and spell “god” with a capital “G”. For us, God is singular and unique by definition. It was otherwise in the ancient near east. That age was populated by different gods, each with his or her own power, agenda, and career. And this is the point: in the Genesis stories, none of these gods are there. In the opening verses we read, “In the beginning God (Hebrew Elohim, a Jewish name for their God) created the heavens and the earth” and “This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that Yahweh God made earth and heaven.” The creating deity is called “Elohim” and “Yahweh”—the names for the Jewish God. Other rival deities are simply not there. It is as if they do not exist. They had been dethroned and demoted by their omission from the story. The opening verse of Genesis is a salvo fired into the world of polytheism, a ringing declaration that their gods were nobodies. We keep reading and discover that this Jewish God made everything that existed by His simple word of command. He simply said, “Light—exist!” (two words in the original Hebrew), and light sprang into existence. In the creation myths of the pagan cultures of that time, the gods created by lots of huffing and puffing (in an Old Babylonian myth, the god Enlil uses a hoe), but not so the God of the Jews. He is above all that. For Him, a simple sovereign word suffices. In fact, in the first chapter of Genesis, all the cosmos was brought into being by Him uttering ten simple commands (yep, it does foreshadow the Ten Commandments, given later). And Man is portrayed in these stories as the sum and crown of creation, giving the human person a dignity never before known. Man is said to have been made “in the image of God”—a revolutionary statement, since in those days, only kings were thought to be in the divine image. Despite this, Genesis invests the common man with this royal dignity. And even more: it says that woman shares this image and rule with him. In the ancient near east, women were chattel; in Genesis, she is a co-ruler of creation with the man. The stories of Genesis cannot be read apart from their original cultural context, and when we read them as they were meant to be read, we see that the creation story was a gauntlet thrown down before the prevailing culture of its time. The creation stories affirmed that the Jewish God, the tribal deity of a small and internationally unimportant people, alone made the whole cosmos. That meant that He was able to protect His People. It meant that, properly speaking, all the pagan nations should abandon their old gods and worship Him. These stories affirm that the Jewish God is powerful enough to have created everything by a few simple orders. They affirm that Man is not the mere tool and slave of the gods, whose job it is to feed the deities and care for their temples. Rather, Man is a co-ruler with God, His own image and viceroy on earth. And Woman is not a thing to be sold, inferior to Man. Rather, she shares Man’s calling and dignity. These are the real lessons of Genesis. It has nothing to say, for or against, the theory of evolution. Its true lessons are located elsewhere. So what about dinosaurs? I happily leave them in the museums, to the makers of movies (I love “Jurassic Park”), and the writers of National Geographic. The creation stories of Genesis give me lots to ponder and to live up to without multiplying mysteries. As Mark Twain once said, “It ain’t those parts of the Bible that I can’t understand that bother me; it’s the parts I do understand.” 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-102) not displayed.
.
.
.
#103. To: A K A Stone (#100)
I can't identify the significance of Carbon dating for hot, molten lava with respect to well preserved organic material used for the Scrolls that I touched on. You are off on a tangent.
YOU: This is your theory, which of course runs counter to evolutionary theory. No, it's not actually MY theory; It's a scientific theory that has yet to be disproven. No, not necessarily. For example, a rock rolling up hill might be viewed as violating the laws of thermodynamics. But what if that hill was beside a much taller mountain that had a land slide? Rocks falling from that mountain gain speed, and their momentum carries them up the smaller hill. End result: rocks roll uphill without any violation of the law of thermal dynamics. Evolution of life into more complex life forms could similarly be the outplay of a much greater dissipation of energy. I'm not a scientist, but firstly, my impression was that may be a case involving the Law of Gravity. And whatever natural "law" that considers the ramification of momentum. In your case the momentum and energy was temporary while the original energy source was as you pointed out, a dissipated energy. I don't believe either the Second Law of Thermodynamics applied, nor in your example did the simple mechanism apply to a living creature. If you are citing this example to suggest a catalyst for "evolution" may be a case of biological "momentum" (or perhaps, "acceleration" of DNA change), the dynamic of THAT much change -- as billions of molecular, cellular perfectly executed and aligned FOR THE BETTER...are astronomical odds. A virtual impossibility. (we're just riffing here, Ping -- exchanging thoughts/opinions.) Like you, I believe we ARE more than human. In fact, I believe we are far more than human than even Christianity teaches, which seems to be that the soul is sort of a that minor part is left over after a person dies. Yes, we are on the same page more than anyone might think. You mean we are far "more" than just our physical shell -- to which we do both concur. It is amazing how few people can actually understand and embrace this simple idea. True, this perspective concept is not taught, embraced or contemplated by some sects of "Christianity." But generally, Christianity DOES teach and concede the notion of a physical body, spirit AND soul. You really do get this aspect of our identity. FAR more than many Christians I know -- never mind people in general. But Genesis is simply not the only explanation available to reach the conclusion that we are more than human. The soul is our primary identity, our human nature only secondary. In my view, it is not inaccurate to say we are, in fact, angels living in human bodies for a short time, and our origin, as angels, is not earthly. Only our human bodies originated from earth, not us as souls or, perhaps, angels. Heavy stuff... Our soul is who we are ultimately. Still and all, we possess spirits AND a physical mortal flesh (or "bio-shell.") Your POV regard -- that man is an angel who dwells in a flesh & blood bioshell "for a short time" is an interesting perspective. God said he "knew us" before we were born. Our bodies may have been conceived on earth, but how about our spirit and soul? For that matter, once the egg is fertilized, what of THEM? /rhetorical. Ultimately, can it be said that our bodies were born/created in the flesh "in the image of God," as extension of our individual soul -- created by God in Heaven? It's my understanding that Angels dwell in Heaven with God. Demons are exiled Angels who rebelled, and who act as an agent of Satan, who led the very first "Rebellion/"Resistance" as "provocateurs-of-sin." (tangential related aside: Saul Alinsky dedicated his Rules For Radicals book to "Satan.") All that said, I understand your Angel = Man concept and correlation. Stated another way in contemporary terms, human bodies are mere rental units for souls, and not something that is created as a result of human conception, which is an idea that is quite illogical, frankly. THAT is a uniquely wild concept. NOT as out-there as one might at first impression think. A "RENTAL-UNIT." (For a soul whose Final Destination is not yet determined.) "LANDLORD": Almighty God. Yes! "FINAL PAYMENT" due on Judgment Day. That leads me to bringing up the next logical question: WHAT is the "currency" for paying off our "debt," aka "sins"? For Christians, the answer or solution lies simply and directly in the Gospel and through Jesus Christ. But because of the natural assumption that our physical bodies define all there is about us, our tendency, and the tendency of the ancients who composed Genesis, is/was to bring God down to man's level, and that's what Genesis largely does. Everything just works under this model. Including evolution, which becomes completely inconsequential in this context. It also explains why God would care about us more than animals. Moses composed Genesis. The Ancients either retained some oral tradition or texts, passing them on. But remember -- Moses SPOKE DIRECTLY TO GOD (Burning-Bush). I don't think ancient man was monolithic about "bringing God down to man's level." In some cases that may have been true -- those who challenged his Deity; Or that this was the purpose of writing Genesis. The ancients -- true logical, faithful men who innately knew of a Creator-God or being much Greater-Than-Himself -- were worshipful and in awe of Him. The "rebel" Ancients chose instead to worship "gods" and representative of them: Statues, other beings, the sun, the earth, etc. THE overall purpose of Genesis is as a historically accurate account of The Beginning, guaranteed by the One who divinely inspired the writing of it, as well as the entire Bible. AS WRITTEN, literally. Why Genesis was also written was because it was vital to "knowing" God as holy, one who created WITH PURPOSE, WITH LAWS, and who loves man, creating us in HIS "Image." Genesis sets the plate for the REST of His Word. Remove it or dilute it and the rest of the Bible matters not.
LOL I think you know that isn't how science works.
I don't understand you. Can you be more specific?
Why? Because there aren't any. The Jews acquired their writing skills by the Babylonians... Moses lived in the 1400s BC. Are you claiming any events that occurred BEFORE 1400-1000 BC and been documented/validated by Moses (yes, like Genesis) and the Prophets CAN'T be true or factual?
You should perform some independent research, yourself besides listening to, "HELL FIRE & BRIMSTONE" sermons. Again, what is your primary contention here? To invalidate ANY Scripture or non-Hebrew-Jewish history and accounts that pre-dated Babylonian documentation?
Are you claiming any events that occurred BEFORE 1400-1000 BC and been documented/validated by Moses (yes, like Genesis) and the Prophets CAN'T be true or factual? Yes, i know. I think there were written records before that ( too conservative says they were all verbal). I can't show evidence of the written records, though.
Absolutely. Bucky is in Strawman-Mode today.
I think he has been watching the History Channel too much.
According to the Old Testament, he lived for what ... one thousand years? That is quite a lifespan, don't you think? But with a range of one thousand years, why have you limited him to just 1400 BCE?
You think, too much. Take an aspirin to subdue the pain.
Facts, figures, places, people, dates, events -- ALL validated. Whether CNN or the Babylonians were there to record it. Some folks also forget that Moses consulted with The Almighty directly. But again, TC might dismiss that as a source for Moses' Ten Commandments tablet and Genesis because rumor has it that Christiane Amanpour or a New York Times reporterette wasn't standing there to interview Moses at the base of Mt Sinai.
As I said a few posts ago on this thread, you nor anyone will ever find earlier records than 1000 BCE; even then I give allowance for error. The first records are coincident in time based on the Babylonians educating the Hebrews about methods of communications beyond just simple verbiage. The time domain is about 500 BCE for the Dead Sea Scrolls. Why can't you find any? Because there aren't any. The Hebrews were uneducated goat herders except for the invasions by Syria and Mesopotamia, wherein the Hebrews fought tooth and nail for their very own sand.
Jesus spoke of Moses written records.
But with a range of one thousand years, why have you limited him to just 1400 BCE? Not nearly one thousand years (According to Deuteronomy 34:7, Moses died at age 120 -- still pretty long, eh?), but yes, the ancients did exceed our current life span by quite a bit. Hundreds of years. Especially Pre-Flood man. Scripture tells us Moses was 40 when as an Eygptian struck the slave: (Acts 7:22-29)... According to Exodus 7:7, Moses was 80 years old when he made his demands to Pharaoh. Quite a resume, don't you think? The Pre-Flood people as well as ALL life on earth -- possessed DNA that evaded eventual damage of the post-Flood planet when all life got smaller, weaker, and died much sooner. Many species as you well know went extinct. According to Genesis, man routinely live to between 400-900 years. We can tell by the fossil record and bones embedded within the rock strata that very LARGE and different flora and fauna were completely wiped out, became extinct during the world wide cataclysim or the Ice Age, never to return after the Great Flood. But with a range of one thousand years, why have you limited him to just 1400 BCE? That's the approximate documented date at which Moses writings are said to have been transcribed.
That's one reason I NEVER watch those PBS or "History" Channel shows. It should be called, The Historical Revisionism Channel. They run these programs under the guise of "history" in order to bait and mislead the confused, the ignorant, or the ill-informed. It's pure political propaganda, lies, half-truths, and revisionism from both PBS or the History Channel. With respect to any subject -- "Science," The Civil War," especially ANY THING "Biblical," you're bound to mutter to yourself, "BS!" or "CHYEAH, RIGHT."
The contents of the Old Testament are largely fictional about anyone's longevity. Why? These folks lived a difficult life (day to day struggle actually) with little nourishing food or adequate health care. So of course they placed their trust in a God, or hope in a God or faith from day to day in a God. Thy had little recourse but to make up faerie tales of all sorts about themselves or the world around themselves. Take Joseph and Sarah as an example. Sarah gave birth to a baby @90 years old! Do you believe that?
Are you referring to the Pre-Flood days? Or the post-Flood from Abraham till Moses... and beyond? There are at least three different eras to reference. The Planet was far different Pre-Flood. So of course they placed their trust in a God, or hope in a God or faith from day to day in a God. Thy had little recourse but to make up faerie tales of all sorts about themselves or the world around themselves. Your lens is seeing things and people through recent eyes and logic. I get it. But you need to examine history fat more than a cursory look that you give it. The more and closer you examine things, the more fascinating and logical it all becomes. You might surprise yourself. Take Joseph and Sarah as an example. Sarah gave birth to a baby @90 years old! Do you believe that? You mean Abraham and Sarah? Yes, of course. In your defense even Sarah doubt God's promise to give birth at her age. considering it through contemporary eyes -- of course its impossible. One factor to consider -- the genetics and DNA at Abraham/Sarah's time wasn't quite as damaged as it would eventually become. Here is a fascinating Chart that illustrates the Great Flood's affect on an increasingly reduce age-span on various Biblical Patriarchs as the quality of genetics devolve over generations. There are further notes on aging below: Biblical Patriarch Age when first son born Age at death Biblical Patriarch Age when first son born Age at death In his book about the history of the Jews, the first century historian Josephus stated the following regarding the advanced ages of the pre-flood patriarchs. "But let no one, upon comparing the lives of the ancients with our lives, and with the few years which we now live, think that what we have said of them is false . . . " (Antiquities (History) of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3). Josephus also states that the reason for the very long lifespans of the pre-flood people was that God decided to be merciful to them and that the food they ate was much better for their bodies than the food eaten post-deluge. The average life span before the flood (ten generations) was 857 years. After the flood, however, the average life span (for the ten generations from Shem to Abraham) was only 317 years! In 2008, the average life expectancy of a person living in the United States was 78 years. The word Patriarch is applied in the New Testament to Abraham (Hebrews 7:4), to the sons of Jacob (Acts 7:8 - 9), and to David (Acts 2:29). Adam lived long enough to see EIGHT generations of his family born! Adam died when his great, great, great, great, great, great grandson Lamech was 46 years old! The Biblical patriarch Abraham had eight children through three women. Abraham's son Isaac lived 180 years, longer than he did (175 years) or Isaac's son Jacob (147 years). Abraham's wife Sarah holds the distinction of being the ONLY woman in the entire Bible where her age at death is recorded. http://www.biblestudy.org/maps/large-chart-life-span-patriarchs-from-adam-to-noah.html
Just to make it clear. I get a little tired tutoring contrary, overgrown and disorderly students, without being paid. I see it as a inane quarrel between liberal dumb high school teachers from New York or San Francisco with snake handling hillbillies. Neither of them has a clue what they are talking about. To understand what is the real meaning of a scientific theory one needs to spend a few years in the research in a quality school or institution. In the religious aspect both "Creationist" and "Evolutionists" are right, in scientific aspect many of them know as much as 5th generation city dwellers about farming.
All contained in "Genesis." And to answer your question, yes, and beyond. What was the day to day life of People all about during those times when there wasn't any free food or health care or mass production of a plentiful bounty as in contemporary times? Miracles handed down by God? In a sense, yes as these faerie tales gave hope to those dealing with the day to day struggle of life. Of course, they believed in a God. Why? To promote their lives as there was no other way for "hope" in the future. There is nothing more important to men and woman to believe in something, often anything, when challenged under forces of great oppression whether man-made or any other natural causes. Do you think the issues of day to day living was confined to just the Hebrews creating myths over 2500 years ago?
You either forgot your sarcasm tag, or are delusional. You're posting to Liberty's Flame, NOT to your empty cyber-"classroom" down your basement or at the pub in between darts. Let's make THIS clear; To be considered a "tutor," one must be hired. You would have to pay ME to instruct YOU. Secondly, the source of "quality school or institution" is relative to the beholder or behold-ee. Stuff that Cert or Diploma from Commie U. THEN, he/she/it must be teaching subject matter based on legit, relevant FACTS and KNOWLEDGE based on legit qualifications from a legit authority or source. (A Bible will do in this case.) (Btw, WHAT are you supposed to be lecturing, and to WHOM?) Are you insisting that Author: Fr. Lawrence Farley in his cop-out essay is the be all, end all answer to the question, "Evolution or Creation Science?"
At the risk of wading in... The oldest fragment we have of Hebrew scripture is the Nash Papyrus. It dates to around 100 BC to 150 BC, or so we're told. Some (but not all) of the papyrus' substitutions from Deuteronomy are also found in the version of Exodus in the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Pentateuch from the 3rd-2nd centuries BC, made in Alexandria. The Septuagint also interpolates before Deuteronomy 6:4 the preamble to the Shema found in the papyrus, and the Septuagint also agrees with a couple of the other variant readings where the papyrus departs from the standard Hebrew Masoretic text. The ordering of the later commandments in the papyrus (Adultery-Murder-Steal, rather than Murder-Adultery-Steal) is also that found in most texts of the Septuagint. The papyrus preamble before Shema Yisrael, also found in the Septuagint, is taken from Deuteronomy Ch. 4:45 which is the only time the recurring formula “This is the commandment(s) and rules and teachings...” mentions the Exodus from Egypt. The Nash preamble correctly cites Moses as the speaker rather than God as in the Septuagint. The insertion of Deuteronomy Ch.4:45 before Shema Ysrael in the papyrus and especially the Septuagint, which has two preambles in the same section: Ch. 6:1 and the interpolation to Ch. 6:3, was probably done to distance the central Shema Yisrael prayer from it context: sections dealing with the entry to the Promised Land of Canaan. According to the Talmud it was once customary to read the Ten Commandments before saying the Shema. As Burkitt put it, "it is therefore reasonable to conjecture that this Papyrus contains the daily worship of a pious Egyptian Jew, who lived before the custom came to an end".[2] It is thus believed that the papyrus probably consisted of a liturgical document, specifically the constituents of a Phylactery,[1] which may have purposely synthesised the two versions of the Commandments, rather than directly from Scripture. However, the papyrus' similarities with the Septuagint, support a possibility that a Hebrew text of the Pentateuch was in circulation in Egypt in the 2nd century BC, and served both the Nash papyrus and the Septuagint translation as source, but which differs significantly from the modern Jewish Masoretic Text. So the Nash papyrus throws rocks at everyone's modern ideas about the era. It doesn't agree with the Masoretic text of the Torah (dating from 900 AD and the official Hebrew of Israel). It doesn't agree with the (offically unauthorized) Greek translation of the Torah called the Septuagint, circa 300 BC. And it mixes together phrasing of the Ten Commandments from both Exodus and Deuteronomy but differs from both of them. Well, that's a fine mess. I included the long quote from Wiki to indicate the limits of what we know or can know at present about many manuscripts and tablets from this era. There was a lot of stuff floating around and, obviously, much of it was not officially approved translations. These text variant could be the result of being part of a mezuzah or a liturgical text, not an officially approved copy of the Torah (by Temple standards). This is a good site by a Jewish scholar of high standing in Israel on these ancient texts. TheTorah.com: The Oldest Known Copy Of The Decalogue If we want to look for older examples of what we call Hebrew, there are just a few. The oldest is dated to around 1000 BC and is a pottery fragment. One thing that is pretty annoying with this stuff is the wide variety of names given to these ancient dialects. Here's some that I can recall: proto-Hebrew, paleo-Hebrew, Old Hebrew, proto-Canaanite, proto-Samaritan, proto-Masoretic, proto-Phoenician, Early Alphabetic and at least as many others I can't recall or never heard of. Quite often, the type of alphabet used and the style of writing (elongated traditional type or the little square Babylonian text type) indicates what flavor of proto-whatever it is considered to be or the spellings of individual words indicate their dating and relation to other ancient texts. This is a technical area that only the experts understand at all. And they constantly argue over all their research and results. Wiki: Khirbet Qeiyafa inscription Dating to 1000 BC, this is a faded portion of text on a clay tablet. It is in the most ancient known Judaean city. BiblicalArchaeology.org: Qeiyafa Ostracon Relates the Birth of the Kingdom of Israel According to Puech, this translation of the Qeiyafa Ostracon “contained all of the essential” components of the Biblical tale on the transition from Judges to the selection of Saul as the leader of a new Kingdom of Israel. In the Bible, Samuel’s sons do not follow his moral ways, and the elders ask Samuel to appoint a king to lead Israel. Despite his initial resistance to the idea, Samuel is guided to Saul, whom he appoints as the first monarch of the Kingdom of Israel. If one follows Puech’s translation, the text from Khirbet Qeiyafa is the first artifact to reference Israel’s first king. Gerard Leval gives a list of narrative parallels between the Qeiyafa Ostracon the Biblical text on Saul: the need for judges who will not oppress the foreigner and those less fortunate; the need for those who will protect them from annihilation; the installation of a king; the existence of servants who serve the king; the injunction not to oppress but to serve God; most importantly, the designation of a new monarch. The excavators at Khirbet Qeiyafa identify the site with Biblical Shaarayim. After David slays Goliath, the Israelites pursue the Philistines “on the way to Shaarayim” (1 Samuel 17:52). According to the Bible, Shaarayim must have existed during Saul’s reign, and finds from Khirbet Qeiyafa corroborate the chronology. Gerard Leval writes “for Puech, the text announces the installation of a centralized royal administration and it makes this announcement to a distant frontier province. He concedes that it is difficult to establish with certainty whether the new royal administration is that of Saul or David… most likely, the ostracon refers to Saul’s accession.” The inscription focuses on the transition from the period of the judges to the monarchy rather than from one king to another. If Puech is correct, the Qeiyafa Ostracon is the only known artifact to reference the first king of the Kingdom of Israel. Its tone suggests that it refers to a recentl event, making it stand out as the oldest account of Saul and the formation of the Kingdom of Israel.
I hadn't even noticed that you were tutoring us. So I don't know why you think anyone would pay you. You've really posted very little since you started this thread. We've somehow managed to keep it going despite your lack of interest.
To get paid by A Pole, you probably have to submit an itemized bill of services rendered.
Life and finding sustenance was probably much easier before the Great Flood. Afterward, likely a best a challenge; at worst a struggle, but do-able. We ALL struggle to certain degrees. As to "Miracles," yes, some have received them and still do. (Don't ask me how God adjudicates this, but yes prayer is involved.) In a sense, yes as these faerie tales gave hope to those dealing with the day to day struggle of life. Ok, I get it. Look -- no one is forcing their view and beliefs. Yes, someone like me will share my faith (and it IS faith, but yes, a faith in God and His promises that must be fed like any plant or person.) People of faith also struggle, sometimes mightily. Very few don't. The very same consumption of the Word and Promises from God has been passed down for thousand of years, BEFORE the written word as you'd noted could only be the case. Oral traditional handed down generation by generation helped inspire all people. Without the circuses, distractions and narcissism of modern man. Ever read Proverbs? (Wisdom) Ecclesiastes? (reminder that life without God is mostly fulfilling and empty) Psalms? (Praise AND complaints to God) Song of Solomon? (In praise of married love) Best "Self-Help" books in wisdom and advice on living ever written. Buck, it's all there for the taking. All the answers you'll ever need. All you have to do is ask God to help you turn just the first page. This Mortal Coil/Bio-Shell has an Expiration Date as you know. Yes, we all struggle. This is the thing -- we are all ultimately responsible for the destination of our respective soul. It survives our bio-shell/flesh. Q: Would you rather live every one of your days and 90 years on this earth as an absolute and joyous King? But at the same time...being unsure of your Final Destination? (perhaps passing on to a dark or silent Eternity)... OR... Q2: Endure both good and bad times during your time here on earth; Struggle in many ways. BUT...invest in the key to a life beyond our bio-shell, and KNOW your reservation for Eternity is set and will be bathed in light and love. Only you control your own steering wheel, direction and place you wind up. Once it's over IT'S OVER.
That was an impressive overview and historical tidbit of the extent of surviving tangible written text. Talk about fragile. It's amazing how long papyrus has endured. One has to be flabbergasted that so much ancient scriptural text has and had been preserved -- enough so to survive throughout the centuries of war, climate, confiscation, and...TIME. Talk about miracles. If God has NOT wanted what *was* preserved preserved it simply would not. Gerard Leval writes “for Puech, the text announces the installation of a centralized royal administration and it makes this announcement to a distant frontier province. He concedes that it is difficult to establish with certainty whether the new royal administration is that of Saul or David… ... If Puech is correct, the Qeiyafa Ostracon is the only known artifact to reference the first king of the Kingdom of Israel... So that is a nice little sample of what we know about the oldest examples of Hebrew and OT scripture. And it indicates how tentative our knowledge is. It is clear that we cannot draw strong conclusions from such evidence. The entire field of higher textual criticism in ancient texts has this problem. A lot of it is just highly educated guesswork, a working explanation until someone digs up something more comprehensive. That's a trip. Imagine the rush for a biblical archaeologist of discovering this? Then translating the text? At this point, I'm not sure if further survival of newly found text even matters. From an archaeological point, anything more is just a bonus. Related to that, my speculation about the giant skeleton findings is that they are being hidden because there are those who may fear having to explain them as well as tangents that just won't increase faith, but instead undermine it. Sufficient OT and NT texts survived -- more than enough to understand OT underpinnings of history and wisdom, the Patriarchs, more than enough to understand a continuum in the NT, the Gospels as written -- along with Romans and Revelation etc. New discoveries are always exciting. IF real and not a hoax -- which is what I would fear.
Heh... Which is why I'd assumed that maybe he just forgot a sarcasm tag...OR, maybe WE don't grasp his sense of humor. He's like the server who brings the mints and check, and claims credit for preparing the meal. Ok Pole -- you got us!
I'd like to see HIS invoice...
So basically you are saying is that you are not a real American and the Declaration of Independence was a load of shit.
I have told you before that I am a Deist, assuming you understand. I am probably closer to the founders of the USA than you will ever be. Let me put it bluntly: the creator left everything to human folly after the Beginning of time. He doesn't meddle at all and there is no indication that he ever will.
At this point, I'm not sure if further survival of newly found text even matters. From an archaeological point, anything more is just a bonus. You need to understand that ancient manuscripts undergo intense processes for deciphering far beyond a slap on the back based on a chit-chat channel. I is through "codecs" which are used to maintain a method of consistent interpretation of the manuscripts which are often small pieces or fragments of documents. The Dead Sea Scrolls are some of the best interpreted documents ever found and lead to some of the more advanced "codecs" which have been used for other documents.
How cute buckeroo. Do you talk to the Easter bunny?
We are endowed with free will; that is to say, to exercise reason based on all information and other evidence to understand the world around ourselves and take action to improve our own lives and family and friends beyond the giving of a tithe to a church; as you say, the Easter Bunny. We have no church in the natural world around ourselves other than what our senses transmit to our reason which is tempered by education. It is self evident. Don't you rely on your own senses to determine your own reason for survival? Or do you go to a church and beg to be forgiven because you feel powerless about your own circumstances whether real or imagined? There's a lot to consider about survival and I have yet to see anyone SURVIVE based on someone's prayers or belief in a Holy Book.
Yes, quite like a Mel Brooks nonsense comedy. Funnier than hell and some well deserved jabs at the church. Of course, those with a stick up there ass will miss all that.
Well you couldn't see George Washington but you obviously think he was a liar.
Hi Biff nice to see you around. I hope life is treating you well.
Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine and even Benjamin Franklin are just a few founders of America that fought for the making of the USA. They maintained relevance to Christianity as Christianity was a fundamental weekly meeting in local communities. But, they were Deists. Why do you say I am a liar?
You don't seem to answer many of my posts on this thread other than calling me "Full of SHIT." I refute your nasty posts. Deists were not liars or not now. There is an important separation of any religious doctrine from everyday experience that Deist's often choose. As an example: are you aware that Thomas Jefferson created the Jefferson Bible? Are you aware that George Washington created the first national day of "Thanksgiving" not for some ceremonial issue to eat a turkey and some savory goodies on the side but to ensure that REVOLUTIONS don't occur again? Just a few, of course. As I write, I wonder about your understanding of Thomas Paine's, "Common Sense"? Have you ever read any of these documents? Have you ever looked for any outside material beyond your Sunday School Pulpit of HELLFIRE & DAMNATION? I am just asking, of course.
Deism was far different at that time, than what we see today. As an example, they beloved the Lord controlled nature. Today Deism is similar to atheism. God maintains a delicate balance between keeping his existence sufficiently evident so people will know he's there and yet hiding his presence enough so that people who want to choose to ignore him can do it. This way, their choice of destiny is really free. - J.P. Morelad www.evidenceforjesuschrist.org
As I have told you before, you know little. You just don't seem to understand that organized religions are full of silly traditions and impractical ideas and ideals that do not respect or understand TRUTH about the world around us. To do so requires individualistic effort of reason, not the belief of dogma: we should question everything; established churches are the anti-thesis of our creator's intent for individual being and free spirit.
If there is no God, then all that exists is time and chance acting on matter. If this is true then the difference between your thoughts and mine correspond to the difference between shaking up a bottle of Mountain Dew and a bottle of Dr. Pepper. You simply fizz atheistically and I fizz theistically. This means that you do not hold to atheism because it is true , but rather because of a series of chemical reactions… … Morality, tragedy, and sorrow are equally evanescent. They are all empty sensations created by the chemical reactions of the brain, in turn created by too much pizza the night before. If there is no God, then all abstractions are chemical epiphenomena, like swamp gas over fetid water. This means that we have no reason for assigning truth and falsity to the chemical fizz we call reasoning or right and wrong to the irrational reaction we call morality. If no God, mankind is a set of bi-pedal carbon units of mostly water. And nothing else.
God maintains a delicate balance between keeping his existence sufficiently evident so people will know he's there and yet hiding his presence enough so that people who want to choose to ignore him can do it. This way, their choice of destiny is really free. - J.P. Morelad www.evidenceforjesuschrist.org
Comments (144 - 211) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestOh you don't have a clue.
#104. To: Pinguinite (#72)
ME: "We and all material life as well as the Universe are devolving and growing weaker."
This in accordance with The Second Law of Thermodynamics (alone dismissing the notion of EVO-lution)...
#105. To: Liberator (#104)
No, it's not actually MY theory; It's a scientific theory that has yet to be disproven.
#106. To: Tooconservative (#105)
#107. To: buckeroo, no gnu taxes (#90)
You will never see an authentic Biblical record more recent than 1000 BCE.
#108. To: buckeroo, A K A Stone (#101)
The coincidence in time of the Babylonian influence over the Hebrews is remarkable with respect to Carbon dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls!
#109. To: Liberator (#107)
Moses lived in the 1400s BC.
#110. To: no gnu taxes, Buckeroo (#92)
It's pretty obvious they [Hebrews/Jews] did [learn ANOTHER or different language and written history.]
#111. To: Liberator (#110)
#112. To: Liberator (#107)
Moses lived in the 1400s BC.
#113. To: no gnu taxes (#111)
#114. To: no gnu taxes, Tooconservative (#109)
Yes, i know. I think there were written records before that ( too conservative says they were all verbal).
#115. To: no gnu taxes, Tooconservative, Liberator (#109)
I think there were written records before that ( too conservative says they were all verbal). I can't show evidence of the written records, though.
#116. To: buckeroo (#115)
#117. To: buckeroo (#112)
(Edited)
[Moses] lived for what ... one thousand years? That is quite a lifespan, don't you think?
#118. To: no gnu taxes, Buckeroo, redleghunter (#111)
I think he has been watching the History Channel too much.
#119. To: Liberator (#117)
#120. To: buckeroo, no gnu taxes, pinguinite, redleghunter, A K A Stone (#119)
(Edited)
The contents of the Old Testament are largely fictional about anyone's longevity. Why? These folks lived a difficult life (day to day struggle actually) with little nourishing food or adequate health care.
Lifespans before the Flood
Adam ? 930 Seth 105 912 Enosh 90 905 Cainan 70 910 Mahalealel 65 895 Jared 162 962 Enoch 65 365 Methuselah 187 969 Lamech 182 777 Noah 500 950 Lifespans after the Flood
Shem 100 600 Arphaxad 35 438 Salah 30 433 Eber 34 464 Peleg 30 239 Reu 32 239 Serug 30 230 Nahor 29 148 Terah 70 205 Abraham 100 175 Isaac 60 180 Did you know about the Patriarchs . . . ?
#121. To: All (#0)
#122. To: Liberator (#120)
Are you referring to the Pre-Flood days? Or the post-Flood from Abraham till Moses... and beyond?
The story of Ireland in the 1800s is apropos here, during the Great Potatoe Famine. They lost everything with Great Britain ignoring the plight. And, all of a sudden, Leprechauns sprung up with Pots o' Gold!
#123. To: A Pole (#121)
Just to make it clear. I get a little tired tutoring contrary, overgrown and disorderly students, without being paid.
#124. To: buckeroo, no gnu taxes, Liberator, A Pole, redleghunter (#115)
Twenty four lines long, with a few letters missing at each edge, the papyrus contains the Ten Commandments in Hebrew, a short middle text, followed by the start of the Shema Yisrael prayer. The text of the Ten Commandments combines parts of the version from Exodus 20:2-17 with parts from Deuteronomy 5:6-21. A curiosity is its omission of the phrase "house of bondage", used in both versions, about Egypt — perhaps a reflection of where the papyrus was composed. 
So that is a nice little sample of what we know about the oldest examples of Hebrew and OT scripture. And it indicates how tentative our knowledge is. It is clear that we cannot draw strong conclusions from such evidence. The entire field of higher textual criticism in ancient texts has this problem. A lot of it is just highly educated guesswork, a working explanation until someone digs up something more comprehensive.
In the May/June 2012 BAR, Gerard Leval adds to the discussion on the heavily debated Qeiyafa Ostracon by reviewing Émile Puech’s translation and analysis for the first time in English. (In the same issue of BAR, Christopher Rollston discusses the non-Hebrew script on the Qeiyafa Ostracon in a search for the oldest purely Hebrew inscription.)** Puech translates the incomplete text on the Qeiyafa Ostracon as:
Do not oppress, and serve God…despoiled him/her
The judge and the widow wept; he had the power
Over the resident alien and the child, he eliminated them together
The men and chiefs/officers have established a king
He marked 60 [?] servants among the communities/habitations/generation.
#125. To: A Pole (#121)
Just to make it clear. I get a little tired tutoring contrary, overgrown and disorderly students, without being paid.
#126. To: Liberator (#123)
Let's make THIS clear; To be considered a "tutor," one must be hired. You would have to pay ME to instruct YOU.
#127. To: buckeroo (#122)
What was the day to day life of People all about during those times when there wasn't any free food or health care or mass production of a plentiful bounty as in contemporary times? Miracles handed down by God?
#128. To: Tooconservative (#124)
The excavators at Khirbet Qeiyafa identify the site with Biblical Shaarayim. After David slays Goliath, the Israelites pursue the Philistines “on the way to Shaarayim” (1 Samuel 17:52). According to the Bible, Shaarayim must have existed during Saul’s reign, and finds from Khirbet Qeiyafa corroborate the chronology.
#129. To: Tooconservative, A Pole (#125)
I hadn't even noticed that you were tutoring us. So I don't know why you think anyone would pay you. You've really posted very little since you started this thread. We've somehow managed to keep it going despite your lack of interest.
#130. To: Tooconservative, A Pole (#126)
To get paid by A Pole, you probably have to submit an itemized bill of services rendered.
#131. To: buckeroo (#122)
#132. To: A K A Stone (#131)
So basically you are saying is that you are not a real American and the Declaration of Independence was a load of shit.
#133. To: Liberator, Tooconservative (#128)
Then translating the text?
#134. To: buckeroo (#132)
#135. To: A K A Stone (#134)
#136. To: Tooconservative (#85)
It reminded me a lot of something Mel Brooks did in a movie. Just slapstick comedy.
#137. To: buckeroo (#135)
There's a lot to consider about survival and I have yet to see anyone SURVIVE based on someone's prayers or belief in a Holy Book.
#138. To: Biff Tannen (#136)
#139. To: A K A Stone (#137)
#140. To: A K A Stone (#137)
(Edited)
#141. To: buckeroo (#139)
((I have told you before that I am a Deist, assuming you understand. I am probably closer to the founders of the USA than you will ever be.))
#142. To: GarySpFC (#141)
#143. To: buckeroo (#142)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]