El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 09:48 pm
^Lol what the ****?!?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 10:13 pm
El-Diablo wrote:
Nice so the Bible condones ignorance? Why am I not surprised? Joe Sixpack is quite ignorant but I guess that should be expected; the Bible told him to be so. I also don't believe Solomon to be wise. I reserve that for people who furthered the quest for truth, you know, like Aristotle, Galileo, Newton.

Quote:
If the bible had included such detailed explanations of how things came about, it would be an enormous tome.


Yes superstition is generally shorter than truth. After all superstition doesn't have to deal with all that icky evidence. It's ignorant believers will believe it no matter what.
Don't delude yourself into thinking I may be intimidated by scholarly posts. I can keep up quite well, thank you. I find it interesting that you should mention Galileo and Newton, both of whom were bible believers. Galileo was at odds with the Catholic Church when he championed the heliocentric view of the solar system. The Church at that time insisted that a literal interpretation of Psalm 104:5 could mean only a geocentric universe.

Galileo believed that the bible was true and the theologians had misinterpreted the scriptures.
Galileo wrote:
. . . two truths can never contradict one another.

In his book [i]Galileo Galilei[/i], biographer L. Geymonat wrote:
Narrow-minded theologians who wanted to limit science on the basis of biblical reasoning would do nothing but cast discredit upon the Bible itself.
Doesn't common sense tell us that when Revelation 7:1 refers to "the four corners of the earth," it doesn't mean John believed the earth to be literally square?

History is full of misrepresentations of the bible used by clergymen to control their flocks. It's a shame because the message of the bible is not at all difficult. It can be understood by anyone. Joe Sixpack represents the ordinary man. I try to make my explanations understandable to folks like him. When the discussion gets overly complex, I begin to wonder if truth is indeed the goal.

So my answer to you, Diablo, is that the bible is written to forgive ignorance. In so being, many really smart folks like yourself have trouble getting the sense of it.

BTW, don't wonder about Rex; he's just having fun. Smile
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 10:29 pm
farmerman wrote:
Some geos dont consider it part of the Shield because its a clearly defined basin. However, the same shield type rocks appear in Quebec, Labrador,Baffin Ile (AND) Greenland, where until the 60s, the Shield was considered just one. Now we differentiate the Greenland and Canadian., We only omit all of the Maritimes, since these are actually part of the Appalachian/Caledonian ranges.

I have to go up to a place on the shield in late August just to review a report with the field crew. I hate to see the summer die especially up there. I know Im gonna see the red leaves of the Crowberries and Blueberries and the aspens will already be losing leaves . Ahhh well.

The rock theyre drilling out is a contact zone between a greenstone and a "granite-like rock" called granodiorite. Lots of heavy minerals, we hope. Back on topic. We had the best geophysics and chemistry and all the Ministry maps but they still missed the contact by over 10 miles. That shows you how smeared these "zones" that real-life talks about are. One has to have been there .


(edited -to clarify the intro paragraph)


Farmerman--

I appreciate your first hand point of view. I am curious since you seem to have traveled extensively and have been to the Shield area , have you encountered pillow lava flows there and if so, are they somewhat scarce?
0 Replies
 
El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 10:40 pm
Quote:
Don't delude yourself into thinking I may be intimidated by scholarly posts. I can keep up quite well, thank you. I find it interesting that you should mention Galileo and Newton, both of whom were bible believers. Galileo was at odds with the Catholic Church when he championed the heliocentric view of the solar system. The Church at that time insisted that a literal interpretation of Psalm 104:5 could mean only a geocentric universe.

Galileo believed that the bible was true and the theologians had misinterpreted the scriptures.


It's not like I deduct points from them for being Christian. I find it even better that Galileo was able to stick to his beliefs and champion beyond the reigning ideas of the time.

I hardly find my posts scholarly either but I thank you for finding them so lol.

Quote:
So my answer to you, Diablo, is that the bible is written to forgive ignorance. In so being, many really smart folks like yourself have trouble getting the sense of it.


While I just geniunely disagree with that statement I do have to say it was a clever retort. I have no trouble understanding what the bible says eno. I for one have never said that the Bible promotes geocentricism based on "four corners of the earth". I read and understood the Bible more than many believers can claim actually. Perhaps that is why it troubles me. I speak more of the Old Testament though. Theres only so many ways one can interpret God telling Jephthah to essentially kill his daughter (of which he does). One of my favortite Bible passages as its ripe with action. But not one I would find "holy" at all. Funny it seems rather pagan of a passage although 3000 year later believers in the Bible will be killing and forcibly converting pagans viewing them as inferior.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges%2011;&version=31;
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 10:50 pm
xingu wrote:
Quote:
Nice so the Bible condones ignorance?


You bet. Why did God not want Adam and Eve to eat the apple? So as to keep them ignorant.
XIng; Check this link to a list of Logical Fallacies

Look up:
subjectivism,
argumentum ad lapidem,
appeal to emotion,
oversimplification and
strawman, to name a few.

Then, come back and we'll talk.
0 Replies
 
El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 10:57 pm
hey "argumentum ad lapidem" isn't listed and I don't know what it is Razz
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 10:59 pm
El-Diablo wrote:
I hardly find my posts scholarly either but I thank you for finding them so lol.
Whatever made you think I was grouping you among the scholarly? Laughing
El Diablo quoting neologist wrote:
So my answer to you, Diablo, is that the bible is written to forgive ignorance. In so being, many really smart folks like yourself have trouble getting the sense of it.
El Daiblo wrote:
While I just geniunely disagree with that statement I do have to say it was a clever retort. I have no trouble understanding what the bible says eno. I for one have never said that the Bible promotes geocentricism based on "four corners of the earth". I read and understood the Bible more than many believers can claim actually. Perhaps that is why it troubles me. I speak more of the Old Testament though. Theres only so many ways one can interpret God telling Jephthah to essentially kill his daughter (of which he does). One of my favortite Bible passages as its ripe with action. But not one I would find "holy" at all. Funny it seems rather pagan of a passage although 3000 year later believers in the Bible will be killing and forcibly converting pagans viewing them as inferior.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges%2011;&version=31;
So, you are saying Jephthah killed his daughter? Sorry if I don't go after your link. I detest straw men.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 11:01 pm
El-Diablo wrote:
hey "argumentum ad lapidem" isn't listed and I don't know what it is Razz
"ad lapidem: dismissing an statement as absurd without proving it to be false."
0 Replies
 
El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 11:04 pm
Quote:
So, you are saying Jephthah killed his daughter? Sorry if I don't go after your link. I detest straw men.


Yes he did. The link is simply a link to Bible verses.

And I was not posted it as a refutation (word?) to anything you said but rather as a rant-like aside. So no strawman argument here Wink
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 11:09 pm
El-Diablo wrote:
Quote:
So, you are saying Jephthah killed his daughter? Sorry if I don't go after your link. I detest straw men.


Yes he did. The link is simply a link to Bible verses.

And I was not posted it as a refutation (word?) to anything you said but rather as a rant-like aside. So no strawman argument here Wink
But, he didn't!
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 11:19 pm
neologist wrote:
El-Diablo wrote:
I hardly find my posts scholarly either but I thank you for finding them so lol.
Whatever made you think I was grouping you among the scholarly? Laughing
El Diablo quoting neologist wrote:
So my answer to you, Diablo, is that the bible is written to forgive ignorance. In so being, many really smart folks like yourself have trouble getting the sense of it.
El Daiblo wrote:
While I just geniunely disagree with that statement I do have to say it was a clever retort. I have no trouble understanding what the bible says eno. I for one have never said that the Bible promotes geocentricism based on "four corners of the earth". I read and understood the Bible more than many believers can claim actually. Perhaps that is why it troubles me. I speak more of the Old Testament though. Theres only so many ways one can interpret God telling Jephthah to essentially kill his daughter (of which he does). One of my favortite Bible passages as its ripe with action. But not one I would find "holy" at all. Funny it seems rather pagan of a passage although 3000 year later believers in the Bible will be killing and forcibly converting pagans viewing them as inferior.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges%2011;&version=31;
So, you are saying Jephthah killed his daughter? Sorry if I don't go after your link. I detest straw men.


Jephthah did not kill his daughter...

She was allowed to roam the hills for two months but had to stay chaste and after she was to return and then from there she was sent to a convent where she was to remain the rest of her life.
0 Replies
 
El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 11:33 pm
Wrong. He did kill her: 39 After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed.

I'm not sure where you got the convent part. I read over Judges 10-13 and find no mention of the word convent...

The following line " And it became a custom in Israel 40 that the daughters of Israel went year by year to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year. " further points out that she was killed.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2005 11:59 pm
El-Diablo wrote:
Wrong. He did kill her: 39 After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed.

I'm not sure where you got the convent part. I read over Judges 10-13 and find no mention of the word convent...

The following line " And it became a custom in Israel 40 that the daughters of Israel went year by year to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year. " further points out that she was killed.


To most of us a burnt offering concerns burning
something with fire. But in Eastern custom a burnt
offering does not indicate the presence of fire. When
speaking of people as being a burnt offering, it did
not mean sacrifice by fire. A burnt offering was a
total, unreserved commitment of self to God. Let us
note carefully this truth so plainly taught in the
record in Judges 11 of Jephthah who gave his
daughter as a burnt offering.

Judges 11:30-40

30 And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands,
31 Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering [Carefully notice Jephthah's promise.].
32 So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and the LORD delivered them [the children of Ammon] into his hands.
33 And he smote them from Aroer, even till thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and unto the plain of the vineyards, with a very great slaughter. Thus the children of Ammon were subdued before the children of Israel.
34 And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: and she was his only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter.
35 And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said, Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one of them that trouble me: for I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back.
36 And she said unto him, My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth unto the LORD, do to me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth; forasmuch as the LORD hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, even of the children of Ammon.
37 And she said unto her father, Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may go up and down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows.
38 And he said, Go. And he sent her away for two months: and she went with her companions, and bewailed her virginity upon the mountains.
39 And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man. And it was a custom in Israel,
40 That the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament [visit, King James has the marginal note "talk with." Young's Concordance says "to give praise."] the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year.

Comment:
Eastern custom teaches us that an unmarried
maiden is a disgrace not only to the girl herself but
also to the family. An unwed daughter indicates that
a curse of God is on the family. Often such parents
give these maidens as servants to serve at the temples
for the rest of their lives. But before the young lady
is committed, the maiden vacations in the mountains
with relatives and a few close friends and together
they have consecration ceremonies for two months,
bewailing her virginity - that is, lamenting the fact
she did not marry and produce offspring. Then the
maiden bids farewell to all her relatives and friends.
Once the girl enters into the service of the temple,
she cannot be released to go back to her friends,
relatives nor parents.
Jephthah gave his daughter permission to go to the
mountains for two months. When she came back, her
father took her to the temple. There she followed the
ceremony all such girls go through. Her head was
shaved at the door of the temple and she put on a
long robe. She then remained in the temple the rest
of her life. During special times each year, people
would go and praise her, talk with her and compliment
her for obeying her father's will. This account,
of Jephthah's daughter shows that a burnt offering
means that she was living in the temple serving God.
Jephthah had promised God that whatever first
came out of the doors of his house to meet him when
he returned from battle he would give as a burnt
offering. Having no other son or daughter, this child
was the only hope of perpetuating Jephthah's family
line. The total commitment of his only daughter to
God's service was Jephthah's burnt offering. Jephthah
felt especially bad because his family line had come
to an end.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2005 05:20 am
Quote:
have you encountered pillow lava flows there and if so, are they somewhat scarce?

Ive been to areas in the area around lake Abitibi(about 300 mi N of Toronto) and Wabigoon(about 100 mi N of the Voyageurs Park) that display ophiolitic rocks and volcanic arc metavolcanics but , because the shield has been pretty much, glacially wiped clean in all but a few places, its difficult to say that there were actual pillow basalts, since these have to be seen on end to appreciate. Ive seen large olivine crystal rocks with a unique texture that Shore and Fowler have interpreted as central volcanic arc stuff. The shields are not great areas to find such structures just because of the metamorphism that goes back almost to the 3.5 GA time.
The best pillow basalts in the Canadian subcontinent are in the Maritimes , especially Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. The really best ancient pillow basalts are still near Washingon DC. The area should be made a "natural history curiosity park" but the pillows have been pretty much vandalized with graffiti and are overgrown with kudzu.
0 Replies
 
El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2005 09:12 am
Quote:
To most of us a burnt offering concerns burning
something with fire. But in Eastern custom a burnt
offering does not indicate the presence of fire. When
speaking of people as being a burnt offering, it did
not mean sacrifice by fire. A burnt offering was a
total, unreserved commitment of self to God. Let us
note carefully this truth so plainly taught in the
record in Judges 11 of Jephthah who gave his
daughter as a burnt offering.


Well if that's the case and I'm still sceptical, they could have at least made that more apparent in translation lol.

But why the mention of the custom of lamenting her. Is going into a convent really that sad?
0 Replies
 
shiyacic aleksandar
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2005 09:17 am
Our God is a devoring Fire! :wink:
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2005 09:42 am
shiyacic aleksandar wrote:
Our God is a devoring Fire! :wink:


Great Confused
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2005 09:48 am
In Deuteronomy 18:9-12, God strictly commanded Israel: "You must not learn to do according to the detestable things of those nations. There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire . . ." Jephthah would hardly have made a vow to commit a sin detestable to God.

Jephthah's daughter undoubtedly went to serve in the temple sanctuary at Shiloh in a manner similar to that of Samuel. She would have performed tasks in assistance to the Levites already serving there.

She lamented over her virginity because, as Jephthah's only child, She would not be able to bear children to extend Jephthah's family line.

That she was neither roasted nor toasted is also evident from the King James' marginal note cited by Rex above.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2005 10:06 am
neologist wrote:
In Deuteronomy 18:9-12, God strictly commanded Israel: ...


Actually, to be more accurate, some person, claiming to write on behalf of God commanded those things.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2005 10:37 am
rosborne979 wrote:
neologist wrote:
In Deuteronomy 18:9-12, God strictly commanded Israel: ...


Actually, to be more accurate, some person, claiming to write on behalf of God commanded those things.
RIIGHT! but Jephthah knew that.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Evolution? How?
  3. » Page 138
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 07:33:02