(March 20, 2014 at 9:05 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(March 20, 2014 at 7:36 am)Bad Wolf Wrote: Why was disciplus banned? What did he do?

Not to get too deep into the behind the scenes stuff, but calling out Deidre was an ill advised move, and when his line of questioning drifted into rapey territory, we decided we needed to make a move. None of this was Deidre's doing, she had nothing to do with our decision, but once the full scope of the situation was laid out for us, it was clear Disc had to go.

Damn that Deirdre. She is so damned attractive though. What was the poor guy to do!

The rape thing kinda worried me a little, but then we've had some far worse things said recently. I thought we were using spades full of loving understanding. I think Deci was apologetic (sic) enough. He was an eccentric and interesting character to me. Sad loss

---

(March 20, 2014 at 10:36 am)Aral Gamelon Wrote:

(March 19, 2014 at 2:45 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Not true. That's a position of ignorance.

Care to tell me why? Unless I'm mistaken when Deidre said "fully embrace" she was referring to all aspects of evolution which include human evolution, which is in direct opposition to Christian creation stories.

Completely wrong. Any serious study of the text will show you quite the opposite.

(March 20, 2014 at 3:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:

(March 20, 2014 at 10:36 am)Aral Gamelon Wrote: Care to tell me why? Unless I'm mistaken when Deidre said "fully embrace" she was referring to all aspects of evolution which include human evolution, which is in direct opposition to Christian creation stories.

Completely wrong. Any serious study of the text will show you quite the opposite.

Care to back that up? I was a Christian all my life and I'm calling bullshit, hobbit.

(March 20, 2014 at 3:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Damn that Deirdre. She is so damned attractive though. What was the poor guy to do!

The rape thing kinda worried me a little, but then we've had some far worse things said recently. I thought we were using spades full of loving understanding. I think Deci was apologetic (sic) enough. He was an eccentric and interesting character to me. Sad loss

There's more to the story that, for the sake of the privacy of those involved, we won't be detailing. Suffice it to say that, knowing all there is to know on this, six of us independently decided Disc had crossed a line.

(March 20, 2014 at 2:54 pm)Tonus Wrote:

(March 20, 2014 at 9:05 am)Esquilax Wrote: Not to get too deep into the behind the scenes stuff, but calling out Deidre was an ill advised move, and when his line of questioning drifted into rapey territory, we decided we needed to make a move. None of this was Deidre's doing, she had nothing to do with our decision, but once the full scope of the situation was laid out for us, it was clear Disc had to go.

I'm telling you, we can't take Deidre anywhere.

I know, right? :p

While I was taken aback by the call out threads, I feel bad he was banned. Like I said, I thought his apology was sincere but...anyway. 'Nuff said.

---

(March 20, 2014 at 3:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:

(March 20, 2014 at 9:05 am)Esquilax Wrote: Not to get too deep into the behind the scenes stuff, but calling out Deidre was an ill advised move, and when his line of questioning drifted into rapey territory, we decided we needed to make a move. None of this was Deidre's doing, she had nothing to do with our decision, but once the full scope of the situation was laid out for us, it was clear Disc had to go.

Damn that Deirdre. She is so damned attractive though. What was the poor guy to do!

The rape thing kinda worried me a little, but then we've had some far worse things said recently. I thought we were using spades full of loving understanding. I think Deci was apologetic (sic) enough. He was an eccentric and interesting character to me. Sad loss

---

(March 20, 2014 at 10:36 am)Aral Gamelon Wrote: Care to tell me why? Unless I'm mistaken when Deidre said "fully embrace" she was referring to all aspects of evolution which include human evolution, which is in direct opposition to Christian creation stories.

Completely wrong. Any serious study of the text will show you quite the opposite.

A basic tenet of Christianity is that God instilled all of humankind with "souls." The other part to that is that human beings are considered special. This directly opposes the TOE. When you lift the hood up, evolution has a lot of parts to it, each which oppose the Bible. Nowhere in the Bible is evolution remotely supported. I stand firm on that assertion because it's true. lol :p

Quote: Nowhere in the Bible is evolution remotely supported. I stand firm on that assertion because it's true.

I'm gonna disagree there. Because there is very little that the bible can't be stretched to support.

(March 20, 2014 at 3:52 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote:

Quote: Nowhere in the Bible is evolution remotely supported. I stand firm on that assertion because it's true.

I'm gonna disagree there. Because there is very little that the bible can't be stretched to support.

I guess the key word there would be "stretched" as in, the truth?
:p

(March 20, 2014 at 3:25 pm)Aral Gamelon Wrote:

(March 20, 2014 at 3:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Completely wrong. Any serious study of the text will show you quite the opposite.

Care to back that up? I was a Christian all my life and I'm calling bullshit, hobbit.

From birth? Impressive early development. Or not

There's been a revolution since you left. I couldn't detail it all here without re-writing a book.

Take a look here, if you can ignore the guys opinion he did a pretty good job at a thorough synopsis. The ideas are by no means new. But the study and support of everything stated leaves YEC etc looking groundless. The opposition cannot support their claims to biblical accuracy where Walton provides it in droves.

http://davidjohnstone.net/blog/2009/12/n...ohn-walton

(March 20, 2014 at 4:28 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: From birth? Impressive early development. Or not

I'd call you a smartass but this made me laugh, for as long as I can remember I should say. My family got me way early but what can you expect from having a Southern Baptist preacher for a grandfather?

(March 20, 2014 at 4:28 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: There's been a revolution since you left. I couldn't detail it all here without re-writing a book.

Take a look here, if you can ignore the guys opinion he did a pretty good job at a thorough synopsis. The ideas are by no means new. But the study and support of everything stated leaves YEC etc looking groundless. The opposition cannot support their claims to biblical accuracy where Walton provides it in droves.

http://davidjohnstone.net/blog/2009/12/n...ohn-walton

I'll read the rest of it later because I found it interesting but I did read Proposition 16, and found;

Quote:Some also object to evolution as the Bible (Genesis 2, Romans 5 etc.) treats Adam and Eve as real people who are very important for the doctrine of sin. There are a number of problems with evolutionary origins of Adam (at what point did he become made in the image of God?, was it only a single original pair?) that have not been adequately resolved. However, there is much more to biological evolution than the evolution of man, so one can use evolution to explain the existance of most of the diversity of life, but believe something special happened with humans.

Seems there are some major holes in conflating evolution with a literal reading of the bible, now I can see where one could agree with evolution and the bible from a moderate's interpretation but then we run into the issue of having no need for Jesus because the original sin never happened.

I have always seen the garden of Eden story as allegorical. It's to explain the human condition, as fallen/ fallible/ etc.. It sets out this central concept behind the faith, in common with many other cultures. I don't think Walton covers this satisfactorily. I'll have to read the book again. If he doesn't, maybe it'll be in the complete work promised. And I think he has other works on later books. Something on the flood I believe.

Me personally, I don't see any importance in an actual Adam. Literalists twist themselves out of shape trying to justify it. I see nothing but fail.

Quote:It's to explain the human condition, as fallen/ fallible/ etc..

We are risen apes not fallen angels.