Quick YEC Debunks

[robvalue]

People can get away with believing false things when they don't impact their ability to function.

If instead they thought, "Well, all the evidence points to that doorway being over there, but perhaps it's all a trick cooked up by a demon and the real doorway is in the middle of this wall..." then they're going to stop that kind of nonsense pretty quickly.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

People can get away with believing false things when they don't impact their ability to function.

Cubs fans, for instance.

[Anomalocaris]

People can get away with believing false things when they don't impact their ability to function.

Cubs fans, for instance.

But it does impact their ability to function....

[GUBU]

I must say, though, that in thological terms YECs are on firmer grounds than non-YEC christians.  Because if you're going to accept the bible as valid you've got to accept all of it.

Otherwise you quickly run into CLs muddled mess of "I like this bit therefore it is true, I don't like that bit therefore it is false".

I accept all of the Bible, but I’m not a YEC

Then you don't accept genesis or any of the geneologies in the old testament. And if the old testament is that faulty (two of its bedrock stories have just been thrown out) how can you then even begin to argue for the new testament's validity as a divine document, as it's based of a declaredly false one?

That's what YECs* get that mainliners don't, if you reject part of the bible you admit there is no reason to accept any of it. Of course the fact that they themselves forget this lesson with later bits of the ot is sublimely hilarious.

*Oh, for a non YEC you do spout a lot of bullshit that'd be accepted in their circles.

PS do you eat shellfish or wear clothes of mixed fabrics? Do you sacrifice livestock to yhwh at passover?

[John V]

That's what YECs* get that mainliners don't, if you reject part of the bible you admit there is no reason to accept any of it.  Of course the fact that they themselves forget this lesson with later bits of the ot is sublimely hilarious.

It's not rejection to note that a part of the Bible is explicitly addressed to a certain group, rather than to humanity in general.

---

PS do you eat shellfish or wear clothes of mixed fabrics?  Do you sacrifice livestock to yhwh at passover?

Try actually reading the OT covenants. ETA: Acts 15 would be useful too.

[Crossless2.0]

That's what YECs* get that mainliners don't, if you reject part of the bible you admit there is no reason to accept any of it.  Of course the fact that they themselves forget this lesson with later bits of the ot is sublimely hilarious.

It's not rejection to note that a part of the Bible is explicitly addressed to a certain group, rather than to humanity in general.  

---

PS do you eat shellfish or wear clothes of mixed fabrics?  Do you sacrifice livestock to yhwh at passover?

Try actually reading the OT covenants. ETA: Acts 15 would be useful too.

Yeah, I'm actually with the Christians on this point. Like it or not, the Christian relationship to OT law is largely defined by Paul's doctrines (there are obviously other NT passages that can be used to support the same points, but I tend to discount them as very likely being influenced by Paul's earlier teachings).

I've railed many times that the Christian use of the OT amounts to little more than a Gentile appropriation of Jewish scripture that undercuts and rejects Judaism even as it claims to fulfill it. That sort of cultural high-jacking might be seen as suspect and a fruitful line of attack, but lambasting Christians for not following certain laws that their own scripture assures them don't apply in light of Christ's sacrifice is a dead end.

[Amarok]

It's not rejection to note that a part of the Bible is explicitly addressed to a certain group, rather than to humanity in general.  

---

Try actually reading the OT covenants. ETA: Acts 15 would be useful too.

Yeah, I'm actually with the Christians on this point. Like it or not, the Christian relationship to OT law is largely defined by Paul's doctrines (there are obviously other NT passages that can be used to support the same points, but I tend to discount them as very likely being influenced by Paul's earlier teachings).

I've railed many times that the Christian use of the OT amounts to little more than a Gentile appropriation of Jewish scripture that undercuts and rejects Judaism even as it claims to fulfill it. That sort of cultural high-jacking might be seen as suspect and a fruitful line of attack, but lambasting Christians for not following certain laws that their own scripture assures them don't apply in light of Christ's sacrifice is a dead end.

of course that just makes their god look even lamer then he already is .

[RoadRunner79]

I accept all of the Bible, but I’m not a YEC

Then you don't accept genesis or any of the geneologies in the old testament.  And if the old testament is that faulty (two of its bedrock stories have just been thrown out) how can you then even begin to argue for the new testament's validity as a divine document, as it's based of a declaredly false one?

That's what YECs* get that mainliners don't, if you reject part of the bible you admit there is no reason to accept any of it.  Of course the fact that they themselves forget this lesson with later bits of the ot is sublimely hilarious.

*Oh, for a non YEC you do spout a lot of bullshit that'd be accepted in their circles.

PS do you eat shellfish or wear clothes of mixed fabrics?  Do you sacrifice livestock to yhwh at passover?

Your hypothesis seems to be flawed, as it is based on incorrect premises.  I don't reject those things in Genesis (as I mentioned before), nor do I reject any part of the Bible that I am aware of. 

As to your post script, no I do not.   Do you understand that the old covenant was made with the people of Israel?  And even for someone who is of Jewish nationality, that this covenant was made complete with the new covenant of Christ?   Do you still pay on bank loans, which you have completed?

Edit to add:  I also do not believe that the O.T. is "that faulty"  or to be thrown out.  You may find Christians who do disregard or throw out parts, but just because one isn't a YEC, doesn't mean that is what they are doing.   I very much still incorporate these things into my theology.  I just see it in a different light than a YEC.

[The Grand Nudger]

Does the bank continue to send a bill when they've been paid?

[GUBU]

Try actually reading the OT covenants. ETA: Acts 15 would be useful too.

Two of us can play scripture tennis, knobjockey. Ever hear of Mark 5:18? But then again, how often do we hear christians ignore the bits of their holy book because keeping to it takes effort.

Either you keep to the jewish laws as if you were the most orthodox of jews or in the eyes of jesus you're not a follower of him.