BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 10:28 AM

If the debate is any indication, Mr. Ham pretends to believe that if the scientific consensus says the universe is about 14 billion years old and some data seem to indicate that it may be say, 11 billion years old than that is evidence that 6,000 years could be equally likely.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 10:42 AM

Depends on what you term as evidence ..

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Lighter
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 11:42 AM

You got it, swabbie.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:55 PM

I think hams point was that evolutionary theories have to posit elements that are not observable to fit their timeline. creationists like dr john Hartnett propose models that reconcile a young creation of the stars with their current distance. his book has a lot of mathematical calculations included after the main text. that is not to say that this model will be the last word on it, and evolutionary ideas on it will probably change to.

just because the Wyoming floundered, and made by experienced shipwrights, does not prove the ark was unseaworthy. I think reference was made to other ancient large vessels that were fine.

I don't recall any personal attack on nye....I shall have to watch it again.
I did read about the Christian today poll. seems surprising, but I don't have that publication, and don't know what its ethos regarding biblical authority is or the readership it attracts.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: frogprince
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:05 PM

Christianity Today is on somewhat the same wavelength as other left-wing radical professing Christians like Pat Robertson Whom Satan is using to propagate the evil of evolutionistic heresy.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:08 PM

Pete, of you want to believe fantasy, myth, nonsense and bullshit masquerading as science, that's your right & nobody is going to stop you. Have at it, with my blessings.

Please just stop trying to pretend and/or convince others that it isn't
fantasy, myth, nonsense, and bullshit.

Perhaps you'd care to expound on the Theory of Gravity mentioned above vs. the absolute fact that things fall because it's God's will?

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Lighter
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:33 PM

"Christianity Today" is pretty restrained compared to some other frankly evangelical magazines.

If 92% of its readers think Nye won the debate, that's a good sign.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 09:27 PM

>>From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link - PM
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:55 PM

I think hams point was that evolutionary theories have to posit elements that are not observable to fit their timeline. <<

I didn't hear that. I heard him discredit without offering any competing theory and he offered exactly ZERO observable data to support his timelime.

>>creationists like dr john Hartnett propose models that reconcile a young creation of the stars with their current distance. his book has a lot of mathematical calculations included after the main text. that is not to say that this model will be the last word on it, and evolutionary ideas on it will probably change to.<<

There is no such math. There is that the speculation that God made the Universe to look as if it were 6,000 years old. After all he is God, why not. But that would allow science and evolution to be taught as is without "corrections" from Mr. Ham. But that would never do. He spent 23,000,000 in donations from crazy people to argue with sane people over what is to be taught in schools.


>>just because the Wyoming floundered, and made by experienced shipwrights, does not prove the ark was unseaworthy.<<

Do you know that in the 1800's they were trying to build wooden ships as large as they could? The Wyoming was not the only attempt. It was just a large and spectacular failure. I think that Nye argued that with the materials and labor at hand the building of the ark would have been a monumental task. I think Mr Ham argued that if it had three hulls it may be able to float.

>> I think reference was made to other ancient large vessels that were fine.<<<

no such reference was made in the debate. No such wooden vessel is known to exist on the scale of the arc described in the Bible, Ever. You either believe it was supernatural, or that it was exaggerated, or you don't.

>>I don't recall any personal attack on nye....I shall have to watch it again.<<<

Ham said, because of Nye's beliefs, he would not want to ride on a plane that Nye had worked on.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 10:23 PM

"Perhaps you'd care to expound on the Theory of Gravity mentioned above vs. the absolute fact that things fall because it's God's will?"

What's the difference? If you believe in God, Gravity is his will. Along with Evolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:03 AM

I love the way when Pete is finally called out on a subject he avoids it completely.

John Hartnett is a physicist Pete got from CMI, the only source he apparently ever consults, and whose he takes with the same unquestioning acceptance as fact as he does from the Bible.

You'll never convince a religious extremist.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 12:22 PM

What's the difference? If you believe in God, Gravity is his will.

Absolutely - its the same unscientific nonsense either way.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 12:38 PM

Gravity superstitious nonsense? Now that's what I call a radical unbeliever...

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jeri
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 12:48 PM

What's the difference? If you believe in God, Gravity is his will.

Consider the possibility that if you believe in God, evolution is his will.

What people believe is limited by what they're capable of believing without freaking out. The Earth as the center of the universe, stars being diamonds hung up there for us to look at, the impossibility of breaking the sound barrier. Consider the possibility that, if you believe in God, he gave humans the curiosity to ask questions and the reason to find answers. If you think you know the answer already, you can feel comfortable eschewing those gifts.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 01:17 PM

Ah, but Jeri- that assumes the ability to THINK...... dunnit?

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 01:44 PM

Pete, I love ya' Bro and I love your heart. I know your religion works for you and that is the real function of any belief......working for YOU. I figure we all could do well with whatever we believe if it makes us feel good and does no harm to others.

But let me give you some caring advice............Find someone else to carry the water for you and put Ham down the disposal. He's spoiled and is stinking up the entire refrigerator. Go get some fresh beef. When Ham says:

"We know from the dates God gives us in the Bible that He did create the whole universe about 6,000 years ago. When we hear the term light-year, we need to realize it is not a measure of time but a measure of distance, telling us how far away something is. Distant stars and galaxies might be millions of light-years away, but that doesn't mean that it took millions of years for the light to get here, it just means it is really far away!"

..............that is utter horseshit. It means exactly what he says it does not. It means more than far away. It means real fuckin' far away. It means that the universe is way to hell and beyond 6000 years old and it means that only in the cartoon world of Fred Flintstone did man and dinosaurs share the planet at the same time. Believing they did makes no sense unless they were just tooling through space and crashed down here 6000 years back and of course brought a few fossilized remains along just to throw us off.

The "Word of God" has passed through far too many hands and to think that Ham has an inside track is would cheapen any god he believes in. Read up on William Sloane Coffin maybe.....or Jacques Ellul.....or the thousands and thousands of brilliant theologians that have lived and studied in just the last 100 years.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 02:05 PM

Or maybe even Walter Rauschenbusch, eh Spaw?

Wouldn't hurt the TeaPublican idiots to review his works, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: GUEST,jts
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 02:34 PM

I have been looking for a good place to post this. Since it so nicely dovetails with what Spaw had to say. I'll put it here. pete, Spaw has give you very good advice. Tyson takes that concept quite a bit further. Of course you are saying that God is in the mystery that we did not witness the past rather than in dark matter. But that means that what Tyson said, IMHO apples doubly to your philosophy.



http://billmoyers.com/episode/full-show-neil-degrasse-tyson-on-science-religion-and-the-universe/


NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON: So the history of discovery, particularly cosmic discovery, but discovery in general, scientific discovery, is one where at any given moment, there's a frontier. And there tends to be an urge for people, especially religious people, to assert that across that boundary, into the unknown lies the handiwork of God. This shows up a lot. Newton even said it. He had his laws of gravity and motion and he was explaining the moon and the planets, he was there. He doesn't mention God for any of that. And then he gets to the limits of what his equations can calculate. So, I don't, can't quite figure this out. Maybe God steps in and makes it right every now and then. That's where he invoked God.

And Ptolemy, he bet on the wrong horse, but he was a brilliant guy. He formulated the geocentric universe, with Earth in the middle. This is where we got epicycles and all this machinations of the heavens. But it was still a mystery to him. He looked up and uttered the following words, "when I trace at my pleasure the windings to and fro of the heavenly bodies," these are the planets going through retrograde and back, the mysteries of the Earth, "when I trace at my pleasure the windings to and fro of the heavenly bodies, I no longer touch Earth with my feet. I stand in the presence of Zeus himself and take my fill of ambrosia."

What he did was invoke, he didn't invoke Zeus to account for the rock that he's standing on or the air he's breathing. It was this point of mystery. And in gets invoked God. This, over time, has been described by philosophers as the God of the gaps. If that's how you, if that's where you're going to put your God in this world, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance.

If that's how you're going to invoke God. If God is the mystery of the universe, these mysteries, we're tackling these mysteries one by one. If you're going to stay religious at the end of the conversation, God has to mean more to you than just where science has yet to tread. So to the person who says, "Maybe dark matter is God," if the only reason why you're saying it is because it's a mystery, then get ready to have that undone.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:02 PM

/dear-mr-ham-you-can-t-have-it-both-ways

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:30 PM

respect to ya too ,spaw, but this is something I care about passionately. I could care less what people think of me, or ham, but as you probably realize ,the faith that works for me includes believing the bible as Gods word. but despite the caricature that this is creationists only argument , there is much more to it than that.   as to the quote from ham ,which you colourfully dismiss, I wonder if you have read anything from creationists on this. it is easy to follow the herd. I have confessed to my limited science knowledge , but I do know that time moving at different speeds at sea level and ,say on top of a mountain is observable science, so I would think that might be a beginning of calculating the problem.......and as ham pointed out, evolutionists have their own time/starlight problems.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:46 PM

"Consider the possibility that if you believe in God, evolution is his will. "

As I said. As most Christians actually believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:02 PM

...the bible as Gods word. but despite the caricature that this is creationists only argument , there is much more to it than that.

Agreed. There's a plethora of nonsensical, irrational, unscientific, made from whole cloth bullshit about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Lighter
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:15 PM

"But Mr. Catspaw, the abstract distance measured by a light-year (some 6 trillion miles) by itself tells us nothing about how far away any given star really is. It's just a form of measurement introduced by 'old-Earth' astronomers to be consistent with their model.

"We know how fast light travels on the Earth, because we've measured it, but we really have no way of knowing how fast it travels at stellar distances. It's unwarranted to assume without proof that it travels at the same speed elsewhere, especially since the bible suggests otherwise. Many mainstream astronomers have recently challenged the assumption that conditions in other parts of the cosmos mimic those on Earth. And, honestly, why on Earth should they?

"Creation science does not tell us precisely how large the universe is. It may well be infinite. But however inconceivably large it is, mainstream scientists have never been able to prove that it was all created more than about six thousand years ago. And they certainly have tried, haven't they?"

(PS: Maybe I'm starting to enjoy this a little too much....)

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:26 PM

The problem is that Ham and his crew of rogue scientists takes little snippets and uses them to lie to you.

Yes relativity implies that time passes differently depending on the relative velocity of two observers.

In fact for the light itself, or anything traveling at the speed of light, time passes very slowly indeed. But what Ham said about a light year is total hogwash based n a kernel of truth. He knows better and therefor it is a lie.

A light year is indeed a measure of distance. That is the kernel of truth. But it is not only a measure of distance, If we know the distance we can, with a high degree of accuracy infer travel time.
Since the unit we are using is base on distance over time, if we know the dance we can calculate the time. Distance in light years divided by 1 light year gives us the time it takes the light to reach us.

Alpha Centauri is about 4 light years away, Divide 4 light years by 1 light year per year and you get 4 years. It takes 4 years for the light to reach us from the closest star.

I recently saw an announcement that a celestial object was sighted 13.6 billion light years away.

13.6 billion light years divided by 1 light year per year equals 13.6 years.

It is as simple of that. So though technically Ham did not technically lie about what a light year is. He certainly did lie about the implications of measurements given in light years.

I, as you do, believe that The Bible is the inspired word of God. Like Ken Ham, I believe that not all of the Bible is to be taken literally. I take Genesis and a wonderful source of poetry, mental pictures, and yes, wisdom.

I am looking forward to seeing the Noah story on the big screen (our 40 inch TV) with Russell Crowe.

I do not see Genesis as a science text. Ham is wrong about Genesis. You do not have to take it literally to believe in Salvation through Jesus Christ. Pat is right to advise you to find a better mentor.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:40 PM

That's what a lightyear means, it's a unit of distance, the distance that light travels in a year. They work out the distance to some star, and use the light year distance as a unit of distance. They could use miles, in theory, but that wouldn't be as convenient.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:45 PM

I am sure that the reason they use light year is the easy conversion to time.

If you ever meet Mr. Ham pete, ask him about that for me if you will.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 06:08 PM

the year in the expression light year just means the same as year does generally. No conversion. in the sense I think you mean Jack, is involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 06:33 PM

Ham and his crew of rogue scientists

They are not, by any valid definition of the word, "scientists".

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Feb 14 - 06:39 PM

Light years (distance) conversion to years (time)

That is the sense that I meant.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Musket
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:47 AM

Newton and God are both wrong with respect to gravity.

The earth sucks.

(I'm sure I had something along those lines on a t shirt in my youth....)

I have no problem with delusion. After all, despite Sheffield Wednesday being to the best football team ever, and will not listen to any dissent from that position... I know that some smart arse might just blow me out of the water with facts. Facts tell a different story.

You know what? I even indoctrinated my kids.... One poor bugger travels from Liverpool to Sheffield to drink Bovril at half time in the rain too.

No matter, the faith is strong....

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 01:13 PM

jack...actually, neither do I see genesis as a science textbook...it is a historical record.
I,m pleased to see you trust Christ for salvation ,as do I. but I also trust his endorsement of genesis as history. it seems more consistent somehow.

I see Gregg is still labouring under the delusion that being creationist disqualifies from being a scientist. on the other hand , I think you can still be a good scientist despite thinking that the principles of causality and biogenesis can be bypassed!
but perhaps it is not me that is the raving fundamentalist!

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Musket
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 01:55 PM

How can Genesis be a historical record?

I only know the first sentence of it, and didn't bother getting any further as it is flawed from the beginning.

It is, I suppose, a record of the strength of superstition in the past, both the original text, whatever that said, and the many translations with bits added for the convenience of those wanting it to suit their more material ends.

History is, by definition, a record of what happened. The bible speaks of things that cannot physically happen. No problem whatsoever. After all, Tolkien wrote of speaking trees and immortal elves.

But in the same way someone who wonders if Middle Earth actually existed being humoured rather than seriously debated with, how can anyone seriously debate with those who take this fantasy called religion seriously? Faith in the idea of a purpose to life is rather commendable, but taking seriously the idea that there are books that know the answer?

I still say children and vulnerable adults should be protected from it.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 02:19 PM

It is a record of the understanding of history and science of its time written in its time for people of its time.

If it were written for our times as Mr. Ham insists it was it would begin with "In the beginning there was nothing then Bang! God created light! Then some of the light became matter and some persists today as cosmic background radiation, the discovery of which lead to a Nobel prize, which people think is good, but God doesn't care because God cares about goodness and salvation and does not concern himself with science because he know all of that "why we are here" stuff already

In 50 years it would have to read something like "In the beginning, there were strings. The strings were looped into other parts of the multiverse and God saw this as a chance to materialize this portion of the infinite and ongoing realm of his reign.

The current state of human knowledge is a moving target. Expecting it to be covered in a 3,000 year old story, is a fantasy.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 02:56 PM

Dear me, Pete, its like talking to a two-year-old about dragons....

genesis ... is a historical record.

Genesis is a fairytale re-written and re-edited so many times by so many individuals over the milennia as to be entirely useless as any sort of evidence for anything whatsoever. Nor can all your wishful thinking prove otherwise.

the delusion that being creationist disqualifies from being a scientist.

It is self-evident, Pete, that this is not delusion, but FACT, if one understand the definitions of science, scientist, and scientific method, which you, obviously, do not - or choose to pervert.

Again, be happy in your delusional world, just stop prating on about it as if it were reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 03:37 PM

Greg F, Genesis is written record of an oral history. Almost certainly represents the author's understanding of the state of the art knowledge of the time.


Of the time.


The wisdom in Genesis is still applicable to humanity today. For instance maybe kids should be made aware they should love their siblings, but to watch for signs of betrayal. The "history" is what it is and is almost certainly exaggerated. The science is terribly outdated.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 03:56 PM

Which author(s) would that be exactly, Jack?

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 03:57 PM

And at what time?

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 04:03 PM

The people who wrote it down when they wrote it. Unless you are asserting that it was magically handed down to Moses from God.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Lighter
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 05:01 PM

There are actually two somewhat contradictory creation accounts in Genesis, 1:2-3 and 2:4-25.

Maturally, it is also claimed that they aren't contradictory at all, and that only "radical theologians" think otherwise.

But they are literally different.

Enjoy.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 05:16 PM

Yeah oral histories are like that! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 05:57 PM

Facts and truth aren't always the same.. Some true stories are factual, and some factual stories convey truths.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 06:23 PM

And some stories are just that - stories.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Penny S.
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 08:00 PM

If you open the programme here, and listen about ten minutes along (there are six days left) you will find Mitch Benn's song about the debate.


The Now Show

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 05:23 PM

yes, lighter, they are different. so what is the problem.
on any cosmic story you could get the big picture, and then zoom in on the details of ,say. the main players.
you say they are contradictory?
do detail. I will see if I can help you with your problem.

musket....let me remind you that it is you who believe in things that cannot happen....

ok - how do you define the scientific method?

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Lighter
Date: 13 Feb 14 - 06:03 PM

Sorry, Pete, but unlike some of our friends I'm not going to argue with a true believer.

You seem to be aware of the implied contradictions but are undisturbed by them. There is an enormous amount of biblical scholarship on the subject, and most scholars thoroughly familiar with Genesis seem to agree that the two accounts do not mesh as they should in a supposedly incontrovertible source. Of Course, Ken Ham would be quick to point out that "the truth doesn't rely on majority vote."

As for me, I wasn't there, so I really can't say which if either version may be the more trustworthy.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 12:55 PM

They are stories to get a point across, reading them as history is misreading them. There probably wasn't a Prodigal Son or a Good Samaritan either, but that's not relevant to the truth of the stories.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 01:49 PM

Last night I read that the first five books of the Old Testament were compiled by the residents of Jerusalem when it was ruled (occupied?) by the Persians who allowed the residents more autonomy in exchange for having their own codified set of laws. There were indeed multiple sources representing and merging the abrahamic lineage tradition with that of the desert wanderers (presumably Moses' 12 tribes.)

Is that exactly what happened? Who knows? Like Ken Ham and pete, I wasn't there. But it seems plausible and it seems to shed a little light on the "one indisputable source" theory.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 02:22 PM

that's ok lighter. somehow I suspected that you only wanted to toss in assertions gleaned from liberal theologians, without really wanting to know if there really were contradictions.

McGrath- there may, or may not have been an actual prodigal son, or good Samaritan. Jesus introduced them as stories. that is not the genre of genesis. and if you take any of genesis as historical narrative, where do you start to do so. the plain reading would seem to suggest a story line.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 03:01 PM

Precisely, a story line.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Lighter
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 04:34 PM

Watch the sarcasm, Pete.

Since you dismiss any theologians who disagree with your unshakable beliefs as "liberal" (which seems to mean uninformed, stupid, or dishonest), there really is no point in discussing this further.

Subject: RE: BS: Nye v Ham SMACKDOWN!!!! Tonite!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Feb 14 - 05:13 PM

For "story line", read fairytale. Or nonsense, if you prefer.

Keep on keepin' on pete -