Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

If, as you say, the bible was "inspired by god," why are there so many confusing and conflicting messages in it?

Your confusion has been duly noted. I'm wracking my neanderthal brain trying to figure out a way to resolve your conflicts. But, as I have pointed out before, it is often difficult for an intellectual to understand the Bible. (Matthew 11:25)" . . .At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes. . ."

1 Reply

@neologist,

You wrote,

Quote:

I'm wracking my neanderthal brain trying to figure out a way to resolve your conflicts.

It's not my conflicts you're having difficulty with. It's your inability to "see" the obvious in the errors, omissions, contradictions, and lies in the bible. It's all there; it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out!

Quote one controversial passage from the bible that doesn't have something wrong with it?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote one controversial passage from the bible that doesn't have something wrong with it?

Sometimes I really wonder about you, CI.

OK, What the heck:
(Matthew 23:23, 24) 23 “Woe to YOU, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because YOU give the tenth of the mint and the dill and the cumin, but YOU have disregarded the weightier matters of the Law, namely, justice and mercy and faithfulness. These things it was binding to do, yet not to disregard the other things. 24 Blind guides, who strain out the gnat but gulp down the camel!"
Most preachers would find that controversial. You might find it conflicting.

BTW, Instead of derailing this fine thread, why not move to more comfortable quarters?
http://able2know.org/topic/211046-1

1 Reply

@neologist,

Here, from Barnes and Noble.

Quote:

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Which strain at a gnat ... - This is a proverb. There is, however, a mistranslation or misprint here, which makes the verse unmeaning. "To strain" at a "gnat" conveys no sense. It should have been to strain out a gnat; and so it is printed in some of the earlier versions, and so it was undoubtedly rendered by the translators. The common reading is a "misprint," and should be corrected. The Greek means to "strain" out by a cloth or sieve.

A gnat - The gnat has its origin in the water; not in great rivers, but in pools and marshes In the stagnant waters they appear in the form of small "grubs" or "larvae." These larvae retain their form about three weeks, after which they turn to chrysalids, and after three or four days they pass to the form of gnats. They are then distinguished by their well-known sharp sting. It is probable that the Saviour here refers to the insect as it exists in its "grub" or "larva" form, before it appears in the form of a gnat. Water is then its element, and those who were nice in their drink would take pains to strain it out. Hence, the proverb. See Calmet's Dict., art. "Gnat." It is used here to denote a very small matter, as a camel is to denote a large object. "You Jews take great pains to avoid offence in very small matters, superstitiously observing the smallest points of the law, like a man carefully straining out the animalculae from what he drinks, while you are at no pains to avoid great sins - hypocrisy, deceit, oppression, and lust - like a man who should swallow a camel." The Arabians have a similar proverb: "He eats an elephant, and is suffocated with a gnat." He is troubled with little things, but pays no attention to great matters.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Therefore?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

If, as you say, the bible was "inspired by god," why are there so many confusing and conflicting messages in it?

Another example of blatant stupidity. You first assert that the Bible contains many confusing and conflicting messages and then conclude that it has no validity which it obviously hasn't if your assertion is true. Which it isn't.

You have awarded yourself a gold star on the basis of your own false assertion.

Even if the Bible was "inspired by God", which I don't think is the case, that doesn't preclude it being confusing and conflicting to you. You have a great desire for it to be confusing and conflicting because you need it to be to prop up your position.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

I still serve on several ed committees for Pa science standards

We can only hope that you resist the temptation to contribute to those committees in a more scientific manner than you contribute here.

Anybody in authority reading your contributions on here would dismiss you from anything to do with education in Pa forthwith.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

SEE THE GENIUS OF IT? iF BLOKES LIKE YOU AND YOUR BARSTOOL BUFOONS CAN MILDLY UNDERSTAND IT BETWEEN BELCHES, THEN THE WORK IS DONE.

Evolution is the idea that the world and what it contains, particularly organisms, have developed from primitive beginnings through natural processes. It is an idea of the Enlightenment and found in Rousseau and Schopenhauer and others and is in opposition to the idea of a miraculous process.

There's nothing remotely difficult about the idea. Difficulties only arise from political and social developments arising from it and from epistemological, philosophical and ethical considerations. All of which you have on Ignore as befits a water-drinking, non-smoking, bigoted buffoon.

As you also do regarding a full explanation of the natural processes.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

There's nothing remotely difficult about the idea.

Noone here ever said that it was unapproachable . It's a damn road map so that researchers into the MECHANISMS and NATURAL SCIENCES dont fly off the road.

Dont be patting yourself on the back because remember, if you will, you were the one who stated that we shouldnt be teaching it to kids, and I said that its nothing too difficult for them to absorb.
SO, in effect, after several years, you now seem to agree with me.

I thank you for the belated approval

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I never said that we shouldn't teach evolution to kids because it was too difficult for them. We shouldn't teach it to kids because it is too easy and they are likely to be tempted to draw facile and destructive epistemological, ethical, political, social and philosophical conclusions from it. As you have done.

Researchers into the MECHANISMS of evolution and NATURAL SCIENCES are not kids. Despite which, plenty of them steer well clear, as you do, of a full appraisal of the matter.

I have seen bullying in a shed full of pigs. The runts are killed by it.

Most of our beef is sired by a small number of bulls.

2 Replies

@neologist,

Well God told me that the Bible was written by a bunch of schizoid old men about 10 or 20 thousand years ago. Claims he dident have anything to do with it.

1 Reply

@neologist,

You wrote,

Quote:

Therefore?

Errors, contradictions, ........

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Well God told me that the Bible was written by a bunch of schizoid old men about 10 or 20 thousand years ago. Claims he dident have anything to do with it.

Good luck on your conversations with God. Perhaps he will teach you to use spell check.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

You wrote,
Quote:
Therefore?

Errors, contradictions, ........

Are you saying that because some texts read "strain at a gnat ", There must be some error of galactic proportions?
Gimme a break.

1 Reply

@neologist,

No, no, no.... that's only ONE example.

If, indeed, the bible is the word of god, there are just too many flaws that one needs to rationalize as myopia of anyone challenging any verse in the bible.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

You picked a wimpy example. But, to be fair, I picked a scripture that couldn't possibly fit your request, considering that you seemed to be asking me to provide my own contradiction.

All in the spirit of occasional levity, of course. Laughing

1 Reply

@neologist,

What else?

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

there are just too many flaws

Provide us with three of them which are worth considering. Flannel doesn't take a discussion very far and your assertion is flannel.

1 Reply

@spendius,

If you bothered to keep up with the discussion, there's more than three flaws.

Here's a good start. If you want more, I can provide them.

Quote:

DT 6:5, MT 22:37, MK 12:30, LK 10:27 Love God.
DT 6:13, PS 33:8, 34:9, 111:10, 115:13, 128:1, 147:11, PR 8:13, 16:6, 19:23, 22:4, IS 8:13, LK 12:5, 1PE 2:17 Fear God.
1JN 4:18 There is no fear in love.

PR 30:5 Every word of God proves true.
1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, JE 4:10, EZ 14:9 God deceives some of the prophets.
JE 8:8 The scribes (copyists, editors, teachers) falsify the word.
2TH 2:11-12 God deceives the wicked (to be able to condemn them).
(Note: Not every word of God can prove true if God deceives anyone at all; teaching from the Bible cannot be trusted if the scribes falsify the word. In other words, the first reference is mutually exclusive with the other three. Thus, the Bible cannot be the perfect work of a perfect, all-powerful and loving God since one or more of the above references is obviously untrue. Note also: Some versions use the word "persuade" rather than "deceives." The context makes clear, however, that deception is involved.)

EZ 20:25 God says that he intentionally gave out bad laws. (This means that God-given laws or commandments are sometimes suspect.)

LK 1:26-38 The angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the throne of David, that he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and that his kingdom will never end. (None of this took place nor can it now be fulfilled.)

MT 16:28, MK 9:1, LK 9:27 Jesus says that some of his listeners will not taste death before he comes again in his kingdom. This was said almost 2000 years ago.
(Note: This passage and many others indicate that Jesus was to come again in a relatively short period of time and not just "quickly" as present day Biblicists assert. All of his listeners are now dead, yet Jesus has not come again in his kingdom. All of the alleged words of Jesus put forth in the Bible are therefore suspect.)

MK 16:17-18 A believer can handle snakes or drink poison and not experience any harm.
(Note: Many unfortunate believers have died as a result of handling snakes and drinking poison. This kind of assertion negates the Bible as a useful guidebook for life.)

3 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

If you bothered to keep up with the discussion, there's more than three flaws.

Here's a good start. If you want more, I can provide them.

Quote:
DT 6:5, MT 22:37, MK 12:30, LK 10:27 Love God.
DT 6:13, PS 33:8, 34:9, 111:10, 115:13, 128:1, 147:11, PR 8:13, 16:6, 19:23, 22:4, IS 8:13, LK 12:5, 1PE 2:17 Fear God.
1JN 4:18 There is no fear in love.
Do you fear the possible effects of gravity? I always feared distressing my parents long after they stopped punishing me for my (considerable) misdeeds. Fear need not be morbid.
cicerone imposter wrote:
PR 30:5 Every word of God proves true.
1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, JE 4:10, EZ 14:9 God deceives some of the prophets.
JE 8:8 The scribes (copyists, editors, teachers) falsify the word.
2TH 2:11-12 God deceives the wicked (to be able to condemn them).
(Note: Not every word of God can prove true if God deceives anyone at all; teaching from the Bible cannot be trusted if the scribes falsify the word. In other words, the first reference is mutually exclusive with the other three. Thus, the Bible cannot be the perfect work of a perfect, all-powerful and loving God since one or more of the above references is obviously untrue. Note also: Some versions use the word "persuade" rather than "deceives." The context makes clear, however, that deception is involved.)
The deception is Satan's. It is permitted for those who eschew the truth.

cicerone imposter wrote:

EZ 20:25 God says that he intentionally gave out bad laws. (This means that God-given laws or commandments are sometimes suspect.)

Can't find this citation

cicerone imposter wrote:

LK 1:26-38 The angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the throne of David, that he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and that his kingdom will never end. (None of this took place nor can it now be fulfilled.)

Who said it would be immediate? It certainly can be fulfilled.

cicerone imposter wrote:

MT 16:28, MK 9:1, LK 9:27 Jesus says that some of his listeners will not taste death before he comes again in his kingdom. This was said almost 2000 years ago.

That was what the transfiguration was for.

cicerone imposter wrote:

(Note: This passage and many others indicate that Jesus was to come again in a relatively short period of time and not just "quickly" as present day Biblicists assert. All of his listeners are now dead, yet Jesus has not come again in his kingdom. All of the alleged words of Jesus put forth in the Bible are therefore suspect.)

Be careful about which direction you look

cicerone imposter wrote:

MK 16:17-18 A believer can handle snakes or drink poison and not experience any harm.
(Note: Many unfortunate believers have died as a result of handling snakes and drinking poison. This kind of assertion negates the Bible as a useful guidebook for life.)

This passage does not appear in all manuscripts. However, the miraculous gifts given to the apostles were to expire when the bible became complete. (See 1 Corinthians 13:10)

2 Replies

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know