Enoch2021 Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Author Share Posted February 18, 2014 I'll be out for a good part of this evening.....Kids Soccer. I will answer your post either late tonight or tomorrow. Please look up the Definition of a "Strawman" Argument. Straw man arguments purposefully (perhaps unconsciously) misrepresent another's position in order to refute it; though what they have refuted is not really that persons argument. You misrepresent my position as denying that God was active in writing the Scriptures, enabling you to dismiss what I have to say as irreverent: but I never said, nor could it ever be inferred except by blatant misrepresenation, that God was inactive in the composition of the Scriptures. My second example may not be a straw man fallacy; rather its hypocritical. You accuse me of knowing the mind of God, when you do the same thing. And, even if I should not be using "straw man" correctly, to point that out is pedantic. My counter remains just as strong--we both believe God inspired Genesis. You think it is plain narrative, I am convinced it is not. The chief difference between us is that you appeal to science, I appeal to the text and the world in which it is written (and Biblical scholars, not scientists). have fun at soccer! ============================================================================================= You misrepresent my position as denying that God was active in writing the Scriptures, enabling you to dismiss what I have to say as irreverent: but I never said, nor could it ever be inferred except by blatant misrepresenation, .... that's a good one. Last one...most of this is answered in my last reply to you.... The chief difference between us is that you appeal to science, I appeal to the text and the world in which it is written (and Biblical scholars, not scientists). "The World" ....The "Culture", Right? I appeal to Scripture FIRST and FIRST. And I've already posted my Algorithm to you on a number of occasions; here it is again, you'll recognize it......... Stories/Fables/Conjectures >>>>>> Scientific Evidence via the "Scientific Method" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Scripture (NOTE: not to scale or Scripture would be past the Crab Nebula to the Right) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Author Share Posted February 18, 2014 Can you give the relative occurrence of these polystrate fossil trees? If they are a result of the flood, there must have been billions of them, and they must now be very common. As you can only post a few examples, that would lead me to believe they are rare, and therefore, occur sporadically at the edges of unusual geologic occurrences. Sorry missed this: Can you give the relative occurrence of these polystrate fossil trees? No, Sorry, My Polystrate Fossil Meter has been acting up lately so I shut'er down. If they are a result of the flood, there must have been billions of them, and they must now be very common. "There must have been Billions of them" Jerry......... you're Guessing/Assuming again. As you can only post a few examples, Ahh I see. First, I give you one...but that's not enough. Then I post 8...and that's not enough. How many do you need? If I prove to you I have a Turkey Sandwich and show you one; but that's not enough....Then I show you 8 and you still want more? It's a Turkey Sandwich Jerry. that would lead me to believe they are rare, and therefore, occur sporadically at the edges of unusual geologic occurrences. Like coal mines?? They're you go Extrapolating from a Dead Cold Assumption. You get what you get when you employ that strategy. Also and I forgot about this. You still haven't answered a question that I posted to you a number of times.... Do you believe that we are here as a result of: Random Chance "nature" or Intelligent Design "GOD". Note: Please don't say it's a False Dichotomy...we've been down that bumpy road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-seeker Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 589 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/06/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2014 Enoch, Yet again my claim to have mastered the quoting mechanism is refuted....so I must paraphrase Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? That to ask that question is already to get side-tracked? How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? I said above that Scripture has two authors who are not at odds. I made this clear by saying author/AUTHOR. The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop--if you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture behind Genesis and the text itself. Read some real scholars who don't care about science and have done a life-time work in ancient texts and languages. Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? Demonstrate this!= ==================================================================================== Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? I'm saying that Genesis is a Historical Narrative How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? Look @ the Text The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. The Author to the Writer. GOD is the AUTHOR of All Scripture All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop-. If you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. I didn't accuse you of anything. You accused You. A Strawman is a conjured Argument made up so it can be easily defeated. For the past month, the whole basis of your argument has been the author....specifically Moses, and how Genesis was portrayed to the Culture (you're not the only one). So Strawman....... Not a chance. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. Yes it is. Do you need another Lecture on it from Shiloh? You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture LOL...see what I mean "culture"? Unsolicited advice? How do you know I haven't been?..... Special Culture Mind Powers? Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. No No No sir. You said that GOD didn't care about the the Time issue.....he had "bigger fish to fry." Reading and Interpreting the WORD is in a WHOLE OTHER UNIVERSE than that. That Dog doesn't Hunt Here Sir....it's not even remotely close. And it's not a Strawman....your mixing up Genres. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. What in the World? The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? What in The World? Sir are you reading my posts? I'm saying the exact opposite. I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Recall the "Summary" that spawned all this. All of it is a refutation of OE (again, I am not a proponent of) based on science and a defense of YE (likewise, not a proponent of) based on scientific evidence. Where is the exegesis? Just 'quoting Scripture'? That is not exegesis. A parrot can quote. Unsolicited advice? don't follow. Because I am telling you that your exegetical method is wrong, I am offering advice? No. But even if it were advice, most advice is unsolicited. Evangelism, 99% of the time is unsolicited. Interventions are unsolicited. "...that Dog doesn't hunt here....". Sorry, makes no sense to me: what dog, and where is here? I will point out A HUGE thing that differentiates us (and me from others of your persuasion) is that I TRY to understand where you are coming from. For instance, I could just leave off saying to your "dog" response, "what in the world?" as you did above. But I will attempt to ponder your response and then give a translation. This is how real argumentation goes--we don't immediately assume the other person is an idiot. Notice that I don't presume to dispense with you by a couple of quick phrases as you are so keen to do. That's because I respect you as a thinking human being. As made in the image of God, I take you seriously...something you and others could imitate. You emboldened "God" which might suggest you see a difference between "the mind of God" and "Scripture". Are you saying that "the mind of God" is completely separated from "Scripture"? That Scripture tells us nothing about the mind of God? Of course I will admit that Scripture does not unlock "the whole mind of God". But it does tell us about certain of His intentions for humanity. When I study Scripture I believe I am studying a "message from God". When I say "study" I mean "STUDY"--not read, not quote. Serious study has led me to my convictions that, yes, the point...the DIVINE, INSPIRED point....of Genesis has nothing to do with the OEC/YEC debate. Or are you merely saying that God, apart from Scripture, DOES care about the age of the earth. If so, then of course He does. He is God. Anything that IS is within His knowledge and therefore within his care. We were talking about the purpose of Genesis, not about speculations on what God is or is not contemplating at this moment. IF there are other life forms on other planets, I imagine God cares very much for them; but what has that to do with Scripture? Again, notice that I don't presume to know what you meant: I gave options hoping to help you clarify so that I might better understand you. Just because I didn't understand you, this didn't entitle me to blow you off with a few short jabs; so I asked a couple of questions. A lecture from Shiloh?? I would if I were impressed at all with Shiloh's exegesis. I am not. He has publicized his credentials (which is not allowed on this site!!). They are--to say no more--no higher than my own. An alliance of mutually flattering people does not constitute truth. God's Word as INTENDED BY HIM is truth. Shiloh is not God. He is just some random guy on a random Christian site and in 200 years he will be some obscure great great grandfather on a family tree. As I will be. Let's dispense with "I am Shiloh" and get on to serious exegesis. clb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-seeker Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 589 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/06/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2014 Enoch, Yet again my claim to have mastered the quoting mechanism is refuted....so I must paraphrase Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? That to ask that question is already to get side-tracked? How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? I said above that Scripture has two authors who are not at odds. I made this clear by saying author/AUTHOR. The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop--if you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture behind Genesis and the text itself. Read some real scholars who don't care about science and have done a life-time work in ancient texts and languages. Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? Demonstrate this!= ==================================================================================== Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? I'm saying that Genesis is a Historical Narrative How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? Look @ the Text The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. The Author to the Writer. GOD is the AUTHOR of All Scripture All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop-. If you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. I didn't accuse you of anything. You accused You. A Strawman is a conjured Argument made up so it can be easily defeated. For the past month, the whole basis of your argument has been the author....specifically Moses, and how Genesis was portrayed to the Culture (you're not the only one). So Strawman....... Not a chance. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. Yes it is. Do you need another Lecture on it from Shiloh? You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture LOL...see what I mean "culture"? Unsolicited advice? How do you know I haven't been?..... Special Culture Mind Powers? Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. No No No sir. You said that GOD didn't care about the the Time issue.....he had "bigger fish to fry." Reading and Interpreting the WORD is in a WHOLE OTHER UNIVERSE than that. That Dog doesn't Hunt Here Sir....it's not even remotely close. And it's not a Strawman....your mixing up Genres. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. What in the World? The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? What in The World? Sir are you reading my posts? I'm saying the exact opposite. I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Recall the "Summary" that spawned all this. All of it is a refutation of OE (again, I am not a proponent of) based on science and a defense of YE (likewise, not a proponent of) based on scientific evidence. Where is the exegesis? Just 'quoting Scripture'? That is not exegesis. A parrot can quote. Unsolicited advice? don't follow. Because I am telling you that your exegetical method is wrong, I am offering advice? No. But even if it were advice, most advice is unsolicited. Evangelism, 99% of the time is unsolicited. Interventions are unsolicited. "...that Dog doesn't hunt here....". Sorry, makes no sense to me: what dog, and where is here? I will point out A HUGE thing that differentiates us (and me from others of your persuasion) is that I TRY to understand where you are coming from. For instance, I could just leave off saying to your "dog" response, "what in the world?" as you did above. But I will attempt to ponder your response and then give a translation. This is how real argumentation goes--we don't immediately assume the other person is an idiot. Notice that I don't presume to dispense with you by a couple of quick phrases as you are so keen to do. That's because I respect you as a thinking human being. As made in the image of God, I take you seriously...something you and others could imitate. You emboldened "God" which might suggest you see a difference between "the mind of God" and "Scripture". Are you saying that "the mind of God" is completely separated from "Scripture"? That Scripture tells us nothing about the mind of God? Of course I will admit that Scripture does not unlock "the whole mind of God". But it does tell us about certain of His intentions for humanity. When I study Scripture I believe I am studying a "message from God". When I say "study" I mean "STUDY"--not read, not quote. Serious study has led me to my convictions that, yes, the point...the DIVINE, INSPIRED point....of Genesis has nothing to do with the OEC/YEC debate. Or are you merely saying that God, apart from Scripture, DOES care about the age of the earth. If so, then of course He does. He is God. Anything that IS is within His knowledge and therefore within his care. We were talking about the purpose of Genesis, not about speculations on what God is or is not contemplating at this moment. IF there are other life forms on other planets, I imagine God cares very much for them; but what has that to do with Scripture? Again, notice that I don't presume to know what you meant: I gave options hoping to help you clarify so that I might better understand you. Just because I didn't understand you, this didn't entitle me to blow you off with a few short jabs; so I asked a couple of questions. A lecture from Shiloh?? I would if I were impressed at all with Shiloh's exegesis. I am not. He has publicized his credentials (which is not allowed on this site!!). They are--to say no more--no higher than my own. An alliance of mutually flattering people does not constitute truth. God's Word as INTENDED BY HIM is truth. Shiloh is not God. He is just some random guy on a random Christian site and in 200 years he will be some obscure great great grandfather on a family tree. As I will be. Let's dispense with "I am Shiloh" and get on to serious exegesis. clb Quote All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop-. If you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. I didn't accuse you of anything. You accused You. A Strawman is a conjured Argument made up so it can be easily defeated. For the past month, the whole basis of your argument has been the author....specifically Moses, and how Genesis was portrayed to the Culture (you're not the only one). So Strawman....... Not a chance. No, for the past month I have maintained a complementary distinction between AUTHOR/author. perhaps the capitalization of the former did not make its point. Your accusation (I noticed you didn't quote it) was that the major difference between us was that YOU believed God wrote the entire Bible (implication = I don't). That is an accusation; since it is clearly false and a blatant misrepresentation of my point, I deemed it a straw-man. Now (notice again that I attempt to understand you by asking questions......and not merely dismiss you as an idiot--and I should add, this actually helps the mind think clearly and make better arguments) if you mean that God dictated verbatim all of Scripture (word for word) so that the human element (apart from the actual hands that moved the pen/stone) was completely overrode, i.e. Paul experienced a blackout, afterwhich he awoke to find Romans finished, or heard a clear and distinct voice uttering word for word, that same letter....well then, we have been at complete cross-purposes and need to reassess whether any kind of discussion can happen between us. Again, notice that I ACTUALLY ASK YOU QUESTIONS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND YOU. clb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-seeker Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 589 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/06/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2014 what does YEC and OEC stand for? Sorry, that was a discussion that, unfortunately, got isolated. YEC = young earth creationists. They believe ( I hope I am not misrepresenting) that the 7 days mentioned in Genesis are literal and that if we add those with the long list of ages mentioned in the genealogies, along with other dates in the Bible taken literally, and then all of that added to.............well, you get my point.....the age of the universe is like 6,000 years old. OEC believe that the scientific claims made by 99% of scientists are not complete garbage. That Scripture was not intended to be taken literally. How they fit an old earth theory into genesis differs. hope that helps clb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Author Share Posted February 18, 2014 Enoch, Yet again my claim to have mastered the quoting mechanism is refuted....so I must paraphrase Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? That to ask that question is already to get side-tracked? How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? I said above that Scripture has two authors who are not at odds. I made this clear by saying author/AUTHOR. The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop--if you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture behind Genesis and the text itself. Read some real scholars who don't care about science and have done a life-time work in ancient texts and languages. Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? Demonstrate this!= ==================================================================================== Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? I'm saying that Genesis is a Historical Narrative How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? Look @ the Text The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. The Author to the Writer. GOD is the AUTHOR of All Scripture All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop-. If you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. I didn't accuse you of anything. You accused You. A Strawman is a conjured Argument made up so it can be easily defeated. For the past month, the whole basis of your argument has been the author....specifically Moses, and how Genesis was portrayed to the Culture (you're not the only one). So Strawman....... Not a chance. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. Yes it is. Do you need another Lecture on it from Shiloh? You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture LOL...see what I mean "culture"? Unsolicited advice? How do you know I haven't been?..... Special Culture Mind Powers? Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. No No No sir. You said that GOD didn't care about the the Time issue.....he had "bigger fish to fry." Reading and Interpreting the WORD is in a WHOLE OTHER UNIVERSE than that. That Dog doesn't Hunt Here Sir....it's not even remotely close. And it's not a Strawman....your mixing up Genres. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. What in the World? The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? What in The World? Sir are you reading my posts? I'm saying the exact opposite. I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Recall the "Summary" that spawned all this. All of it is a refutation of OE (again, I am not a proponent of) based on science and a defense of YE (likewise, not a proponent of) based on scientific evidence. Where is the exegesis? Just 'quoting Scripture'? That is not exegesis. A parrot can quote. Unsolicited advice? don't follow. Because I am telling you that your exegetical method is wrong, I am offering advice? No. But even if it were advice, most advice is unsolicited. Evangelism, 99% of the time is unsolicited. Interventions are unsolicited. "...that Dog doesn't hunt here....". Sorry, makes no sense to me: what dog, and where is here? I will point out A HUGE thing that differentiates us (and me from others of your persuasion) is that I TRY to understand where you are coming from. For instance, I could just leave off saying to your "dog" response, "what in the world?" as you did above. But I will attempt to ponder your response and then give a translation. This is how real argumentation goes--we don't immediately assume the other person is an idiot. Notice that I don't presume to dispense with you by a couple of quick phrases as you are so keen to do. That's because I respect you as a thinking human being. As made in the image of God, I take you seriously...something you and others could imitate. You emboldened "God" which might suggest you see a difference between "the mind of God" and "Scripture". Are you saying that "the mind of God" is completely separated from "Scripture"? That Scripture tells us nothing about the mind of God? Of course I will admit that Scripture does not unlock "the whole mind of God". But it does tell us about certain of His intentions for humanity. When I study Scripture I believe I am studying a "message from God". When I say "study" I mean "STUDY"--not read, not quote. Serious study has led me to my convictions that, yes, the point...the DIVINE, INSPIRED point....of Genesis has nothing to do with the OEC/YEC debate. Or are you merely saying that God, apart from Scripture, DOES care about the age of the earth. If so, then of course He does. He is God. Anything that IS is within His knowledge and therefore within his care. We were talking about the purpose of Genesis, not about speculations on what God is or is not contemplating at this moment. IF there are other life forms on other planets, I imagine God cares very much for them; but what has that to do with Scripture? Again, notice that I don't presume to know what you meant: I gave options hoping to help you clarify so that I might better understand you. Just because I didn't understand you, this didn't entitle me to blow you off with a few short jabs; so I asked a couple of questions. A lecture from Shiloh?? I would if I were impressed at all with Shiloh's exegesis. I am not. He has publicized his credentials (which is not allowed on this site!!). They are--to say no more--no higher than my own. An alliance of mutually flattering people does not constitute truth. God's Word as INTENDED BY HIM is truth. Shiloh is not God. He is just some random guy on a random Christian site and in 200 years he will be some obscure great great grandfather on a family tree. As I will be. Let's dispense with "I am Shiloh" and get on to serious exegesis. clb =================================================================================================== I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Ok. I'm not going through your whole post....the record is in this and other threads. 2 Questions: 1. Where do you stand? OEC or YEC (or other) 2. Why in the World do I need to study the Culture? What Culture? Shiloh is not God. That is Most Likely True. However; I'm 100% convinced he was sent here by GOD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-seeker Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 589 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/06/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2014 (edited) Enoch, Yet again my claim to have mastered the quoting mechanism is refuted....so I must paraphrase Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? That to ask that question is already to get side-tracked? How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? I said above that Scripture has two authors who are not at odds. I made this clear by saying author/AUTHOR. The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop--if you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture behind Genesis and the text itself. Read some real scholars who don't care about science and have done a life-time work in ancient texts and languages. Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? Demonstrate this!= ==================================================================================== Are you saying that the question, "what genre is a particular text?" is NOT important? I'm saying that Genesis is a Historical Narrative How is one to differentiate a parable from a psalm if they don't ask this question? Look @ the Text The Great AUTHOR working through the human author. The Author to the Writer. GOD is the AUTHOR of All Scripture All accusations that I think Scripture uninspired really need to stop-. If you must put up a strawman, put up a new one for a change, that one has taken its beating. I didn't accuse you of anything. You accused You. A Strawman is a conjured Argument made up so it can be easily defeated. For the past month, the whole basis of your argument has been the author....specifically Moses, and how Genesis was portrayed to the Culture (you're not the only one). So Strawman....... Not a chance. And no. It is not quite simply an historical narrative. Yes it is. Do you need another Lecture on it from Shiloh? You need to spend less time obsessing over science and more time studying the culture LOL...see what I mean "culture"? Unsolicited advice? How do you know I haven't been?..... Special Culture Mind Powers? Do I presume to know the mind of God? In some instances, yes, for God has told me through His word. You claim the same thing: you claim it is CLEARLY an historical narrative--that is, that you have looked into the mind of God and presume to know what He intended when writing Genesis. Again, Sir, a strawman. No No No sir. You said that GOD didn't care about the the Time issue.....he had "bigger fish to fry." Reading and Interpreting the WORD is in a WHOLE OTHER UNIVERSE than that. That Dog doesn't Hunt Here Sir....it's not even remotely close. And it's not a Strawman....your mixing up Genres. Please put together a new one; that one is obliterated and it looks silly to see a man swinging at a bunch of straw scattered about. What in the World? The other flood accounts bear too many similarities to God's flood--are you saying that they had the Genesis text and corrupted it? What in The World? Sir are you reading my posts? I'm saying the exact opposite. I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Recall the "Summary" that spawned all this. All of it is a refutation of OE (again, I am not a proponent of) based on science and a defense of YE (likewise, not a proponent of) based on scientific evidence. Where is the exegesis? Just 'quoting Scripture'? That is not exegesis. A parrot can quote. Unsolicited advice? don't follow. Because I am telling you that your exegetical method is wrong, I am offering advice? No. But even if it were advice, most advice is unsolicited. Evangelism, 99% of the time is unsolicited. Interventions are unsolicited. "...that Dog doesn't hunt here....". Sorry, makes no sense to me: what dog, and where is here? I will point out A HUGE thing that differentiates us (and me from others of your persuasion) is that I TRY to understand where you are coming from. For instance, I could just leave off saying to your "dog" response, "what in the world?" as you did above. But I will attempt to ponder your response and then give a translation. This is how real argumentation goes--we don't immediately assume the other person is an idiot. Notice that I don't presume to dispense with you by a couple of quick phrases as you are so keen to do. That's because I respect you as a thinking human being. As made in the image of God, I take you seriously...something you and others could imitate. You emboldened "God" which might suggest you see a difference between "the mind of God" and "Scripture". Are you saying that "the mind of God" is completely separated from "Scripture"? That Scripture tells us nothing about the mind of God? Of course I will admit that Scripture does not unlock "the whole mind of God". But it does tell us about certain of His intentions for humanity. When I study Scripture I believe I am studying a "message from God". When I say "study" I mean "STUDY"--not read, not quote. Serious study has led me to my convictions that, yes, the point...the DIVINE, INSPIRED point....of Genesis has nothing to do with the OEC/YEC debate. Or are you merely saying that God, apart from Scripture, DOES care about the age of the earth. If so, then of course He does. He is God. Anything that IS is within His knowledge and therefore within his care. We were talking about the purpose of Genesis, not about speculations on what God is or is not contemplating at this moment. IF there are other life forms on other planets, I imagine God cares very much for them; but what has that to do with Scripture? Again, notice that I don't presume to know what you meant: I gave options hoping to help you clarify so that I might better understand you. Just because I didn't understand you, this didn't entitle me to blow you off with a few short jabs; so I asked a couple of questions. A lecture from Shiloh?? I would if I were impressed at all with Shiloh's exegesis. I am not. He has publicized his credentials (which is not allowed on this site!!). They are--to say no more--no higher than my own. An alliance of mutually flattering people does not constitute truth. God's Word as INTENDED BY HIM is truth. Shiloh is not God. He is just some random guy on a random Christian site and in 200 years he will be some obscure great great grandfather on a family tree. As I will be. Let's dispense with "I am Shiloh" and get on to serious exegesis. clb =================================================================================================== I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Ok. I'm not going through your whole post....the record is in this and other threads. 2 Questions: 1. Where do you stand? OEC or YEC (or other) 2. Why in the World do I need to study the Culture? What Culture? Shiloh is not God. That is Most Likely True. However; I'm 100% convinced he was sent here by GOD. Me too The question is, Why? To teach or to learn (for one thing, humility and graciousness)? But I do appreciate that you asked me questions!! As to the OEC/YEC. I don't care. I suppose there seems to be more reasons to accept an OEC. But you guys have helped me greatly (the Scientific Method!!!) to understand it is not conclusive (i.e. proved) and CANNOT EVEN BE PROVED. I am truly thankful for that insight. But if even a YEC should be proved by science (which it can't, right?) it would still not change my approach to Scripture. The cultural elements have been posted elsewhere as a separate thread. I posted them formerly but they were deleted on the grounds of "presuming to teach". I tried to rephrase the whole bit. I am not allowed to post them anywhere else. clb Edited February 18, 2014 by ConnorLiamBrown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Author Share Posted February 18, 2014 I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Ok. I'm not going through your whole post....the record is in this and other threads. 2 Questions: 1. Where do you stand? OEC or YEC (or other) 2. Why in the World do I need to study the Culture? What Culture? Shiloh is not God. That is Most Likely True. However; I'm 100% convinced he was sent here by GOD. Me too The question is, Why? To teach or to learn (for one thing, humility and graciousness)? Now, I was over in the first paragraph of your New Thread and I got a Pop Up....You're on a roll tonight You didn't answer the 2 Questions well I guess three. What Culture will teach me? And where do you stand OEC/YEC or other? To teach or to learn (for one thing, humility and graciousness)? Are you saying I'm not humble or gracious? And that's 2 things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gray wolf Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 28 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,046 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 194 Days Won: 2 Joined: 09/25/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/30/1960 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I am astounded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-seeker Posted February 18, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 589 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/06/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2014 I say you need to spend more time studying the culture because all I have seen is your studies of science. Ok. I'm not going through your whole post....the record is in this and other threads. 2 Questions: 1. Where do you stand? OEC or YEC (or other) 2. Why in the World do I need to study the Culture? What Culture? Shiloh is not God. That is Most Likely True. However; I'm 100% convinced he was sent here by GOD. Me too The question is, Why? To teach or to learn (for one thing, humility and graciousness)? Now, I was over in the first paragraph of your New Thread and I got a Pop Up....You're on a roll tonight You didn't answer the 2 Questions well I guess three. What Culture will teach me? And where do you stand OEC/YEC or other? To teach or to learn (for one thing, humility and graciousness)? Are you saying I'm not humble or gracious? And that's 2 things I'm confused (and was nervous to reply since it seems I am disrupting you from reading the very thing that will answer one of your questions). But I'll answer again. Yes, I do think your rhetorical style is dismissive and therefore ungracious, as well (and even more so) Shiloh's. The comment was really about Shiloh. I don't like the quick "Quote" followed by a one liner. I put a lot of thought into my responses. I try to understand the other side; when I don't, I try to ask questions so as to better clarify what they are saying--otherwise, how can I disagree or agree with them?! I don't see this occurring very often. Typically people on this site start from the observation "this person disagrees with me" and then move immediately to the step "how can I refute them?" The question "how does he disagree with me and why" is omitted from the process. Thus the "refutations" are short and degrading. I am not claiming innocence. But I think we can all try better (again, a selfish incentive, but it will actually improve our ability to refute---look at Socrates!) My new thread will point out the cultural elements. You say "I study Scripture against Scripture" or something to that effect. But Scripture is not written in a vacuum. English translations depend upon studying not only how words are used in Scripture, but outside of Scripture. Every commentary you pick up will make a reference to some document existing outside of Scripture. If you study Milton's Paradise Lost with no knowledge of the 17th c. England, you will miss much and misinterpret much. Think about it: do you presume to translate and comment on the earliest manuscripts of Beowulf as well as scholars? Why is Scripture so different? I answered above that the YEC/OEC debate doesn't interest me. I said I supposed that for now the OEC has a stronger case--I mentioned my appreciation for yours and other's reminder of the Scientific Method which shows neither can be proved. I'll stay in tune with the physical sciences (i.e. excluding history or textual criticism or archaeology or anthropology) only because it's fascinating (in other words, anything dealing with the age of the earth or the big bang or evolution). If you insist on putting me in a class, I can only ask, Why? clb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts