RE: Can Christianity explain how animals are so locationally diverse
July 12, 2012 at 8:37 am
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2012 at 8:53 am by Drich.)
[quote='Minimalist' pid='308612' dateline='1341962454']
There is no geological evidence that Australia was flooded to the tops of its mountain tops any more than anywhere else on the earth.
It is a fucking stupid story that Jewish morons stole from the Sumerians and then xtian morons stole it from them.
[/quote]
How would we know what 'geological evidence' would look like for a 'world wide' flood? what we look for now is material moved from point A to point B, (Things that once resided on High ground, but were moved to low) The typical wash out or river over flow is not consistent with the description of how the earth was flooded. How do we know the evidence we are looking for is not what we are looking at? Because if it was truly a planet wide flood all of the data we have would have been influenced by this event. thereby altering all of the base line evidence
[quote='aleialoura' pid='308615' dateline='1341962924']
[quote]So is the bible the infallible word of god, Drich?[/quote]
Yes
[quote]Or is it just some slapped together piece of garbage written by ignorant men who didn't have the foresight to see how open to interpretations it is?[/quote]
[quote]Or was it translated incorrectly?[/quote]Are you limited to only one language? Is english the only thing you can read or write? Have you never taken one foeign language class? If you have then you should know the difference between a literal translation, and a contextual one. Literal translation is a work that is taken and recorded as close to the orginal as possiable. For when you go from one language to another things are litterally lost in the act of translating. Because not every language has words to describe what all other languages have. Syntax is another issue (The order in which a simple sentence is constructed.) Even so a litteral translation (Like all of the bibles you all seem to only know and quote from) takes all of these things into account and rewrites God's word into something you can read. God's orginal work does not change, only your translation does. That is why the people who want to know the truth of God's word spend decades studying the orginal script.
[quote] If you'd looked into it deeply and objectively, there is no way you'd believe any of that crap. [/quote]
are you new here?
[quote]You, Drich, are the most condescending theist I've ever met (binary wise).[/quote]My work simply reflects the timber and effort of your own works. (this is me doing unto you) If you do not like what you see try a different approach.
[quote]You've no basis for it because anyone with a quarter of a brain can read your posts and know that you don't really think things through.[/quote]I intentionally leave things 'open' to inspire dialog. The bit above for example. As i am not allowed to preach I must find otherways to get people like you to ask for explaination, giving me oppertunities to teach things like how your translation came about. So that you can understand the God's word is infalliable, but if you only know it in english then you have never seen 'God's word.'
[quote] Jesus was a Jew. His book was the Old Testament. You discard the OT when it's convenient to your own argument, and then reference it as if it's the living word of god and absolutely true. I've seen you defend it.[/quote]You have mis identified my effort here I did not disregaurd anything. I simply corrected a misidentification of the account of noah's ark. I spent 20 pages when I first came here answering questions on Noah's ark. I amnot discarding anything by any means.
[quote]So, Drich's answer is:
The flood shit was in the old testament which is Judaism, ergo, NO, Christianity can't explain anything about the locational diversity of species. [/quote]
Actually no. I simply pointed out a misreading/understanding of the OT and provided a glimps of another possiablity of what could have happened if said reading was accurate.
There is no geological evidence that Australia was flooded to the tops of its mountain tops any more than anywhere else on the earth.
It is a fucking stupid story that Jewish morons stole from the Sumerians and then xtian morons stole it from them.
[/quote]
How would we know what 'geological evidence' would look like for a 'world wide' flood? what we look for now is material moved from point A to point B, (Things that once resided on High ground, but were moved to low) The typical wash out or river over flow is not consistent with the description of how the earth was flooded. How do we know the evidence we are looking for is not what we are looking at? Because if it was truly a planet wide flood all of the data we have would have been influenced by this event. thereby altering all of the base line evidence
[quote='aleialoura' pid='308615' dateline='1341962924']
[quote]So is the bible the infallible word of god, Drich?[/quote]
Yes
[quote]Or is it just some slapped together piece of garbage written by ignorant men who didn't have the foresight to see how open to interpretations it is?[/quote]
[quote]Or was it translated incorrectly?[/quote]Are you limited to only one language? Is english the only thing you can read or write? Have you never taken one foeign language class? If you have then you should know the difference between a literal translation, and a contextual one. Literal translation is a work that is taken and recorded as close to the orginal as possiable. For when you go from one language to another things are litterally lost in the act of translating. Because not every language has words to describe what all other languages have. Syntax is another issue (The order in which a simple sentence is constructed.) Even so a litteral translation (Like all of the bibles you all seem to only know and quote from) takes all of these things into account and rewrites God's word into something you can read. God's orginal work does not change, only your translation does. That is why the people who want to know the truth of God's word spend decades studying the orginal script.
[quote] If you'd looked into it deeply and objectively, there is no way you'd believe any of that crap. [/quote]
are you new here?[quote]You, Drich, are the most condescending theist I've ever met (binary wise).[/quote]My work simply reflects the timber and effort of your own works. (this is me doing unto you) If you do not like what you see try a different approach.
[quote]You've no basis for it because anyone with a quarter of a brain can read your posts and know that you don't really think things through.[/quote]I intentionally leave things 'open' to inspire dialog. The bit above for example. As i am not allowed to preach I must find otherways to get people like you to ask for explaination, giving me oppertunities to teach things like how your translation came about. So that you can understand the God's word is infalliable, but if you only know it in english then you have never seen 'God's word.'
[quote] Jesus was a Jew. His book was the Old Testament. You discard the OT when it's convenient to your own argument, and then reference it as if it's the living word of god and absolutely true. I've seen you defend it.[/quote]You have mis identified my effort here I did not disregaurd anything. I simply corrected a misidentification of the account of noah's ark. I spent 20 pages when I first came here answering questions on Noah's ark. I amnot discarding anything by any means.
[quote]So, Drich's answer is:
The flood shit was in the old testament which is Judaism, ergo, NO, Christianity can't explain anything about the locational diversity of species. [/quote]
Actually no. I simply pointed out a misreading/understanding of the OT and provided a glimps of another possiablity of what could have happened if said reading was accurate.
