Creation vs. Evolution

[Potapko]

You realize the link you post here actually debunks the article you copied and pasted. The site you found that on was one pointing out the fallacy in his argument.

Actually yes!
I fully expected someone to point that out, thereby showing themselves to fit the mold of the person Baumgardner was writing about. As did the one attempting to hehe "debunk"? the math.

Of course Thall fell for it as always. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[sheck33]

Actually yes!
I fully expected someone to point that out, thereby showing themselves to fit the mold of the person Baumgardner was writing about. As did the one attempting to hehe "debunk"? the math.

Of course Thall fell for it as always. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

The math was debunked a long time ago. The 'math' creationists use to 'prove' their points is comical.

 

[nereas]

I understand. Lots of people drive a car and use household appliances without having any clue about what makes them work too.

That works for most people but putting a little more effort in generally leads to greater understanding and, in the case of scripture, often results in stronger faith. For every person who has lost faith as a result of research, there is another who has gained, or increased, faith as a result. I fall into the later group.

Exactly right! I also fall into the latter group.

By remembrance that the Biblical scriptures (scrolls) were originally written to communicate ethical concepts to bronze and early iron age peoples, by prophets (Hebrew NABI = inspired; Greek PROFETAS = tells-in-advance), their lack of 21st Century scientific qualities can be better understood and accepted.

Also by remembering that "modern day" science is only a grab-bag of theories and hypotheses misnamed "laws" and that someday in the future all that we now "know" about science will be considered fiction, then science's lack of conformity with the Biblical "scriptures" can also be accepted. And thus the two can easily be reconciled.

It should be remember as well that to many people, science serves as their own religion. Hence, it is not good to mix science and religion in conversation. Stick with one or the other.

Religion tries to explain why.

Science tries to explain how.

They have very little in common.

 

[nereas]

Spoken like someone just looking up info the internets and then pretending to be a scholar.

The right answer (to make it look like you know what you are talking about) is:
Then in the second chapter, we meet YHWH.

JHVH is poor english transliteration.

JHVH is an exact Hebrew-English translation. The vowel points for this name are unknown.

And in case you did not know it, the letter "Y" which you persist in using was not even invented until about the 7th Century BC by the Greeks.

***

If you DecoMartini persist in posting your untruths, I will be forced to mute you. If that is your goal, then keep it up, buddy.

 

[nereas]

Correct. And what is our science teacher who is required to teach creation to do with this?

ELOHIM, who is usually described as a spirit with no bodily features, creates the entire universe in 6 days in chapter 1 of Genesis. When he gets around to creating humanity on the 6th day, he creates male and female together.

JHVH, or Yahweh (originally mistranslated as Jehovah), who is a humanlike deity who walks with Adam and Eve in the garden and shows his hindquarters to Moses, creates everything in one day in chapter 2 of Genesis, except he only creates a male, and then decides later to create a female from his rib.

Imagine our biology teacher explaining those two contradictory versions of craetion to a class and then asking them to talk about them from a scientific perspective.

Which one of these Gods did all this creating, anyway? ELOHIM in 6 days, or JHVH in one day?

The questions that you ask have no answers that are known.

The Jewish people have traditions that ELOHIM and JHVH are the same personage, however we are not told that definitively anywhere by Moses (Moshe) or any of the other authoritative prophets.

If you are a Christian, then it is easy to allow that ELOHIM can be the "Father" spoken of by Christ and by St. Paul in the N/T, and YHVH can be either the Holy Spirit or Jesus, at any rate, some other personage.

If your Christianity is fettered with the dogma that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all-in-one, a major issue that was debated at the early councils in the 4th Century A.D. (C.E.), then there arises a bit more confusion and less flexibility in belief.

As far as the creations, whether there was one or there were two or even billions, that we do not know. I would presume that there have been many, because I cannot imagine that the Earth is the only creation.

As I said, if you read the Biblical scriptures in their original languages yourself, then you are not burdened nor confused by the creeping-in of odd false dogmas into the English translations.

You can learn Hebrew in about a year, and Greek in about two or three. There are classes available at your local community college.

If you are going to ask questions like this, you need to do some significant learning, to be able to answer them. And existentialist philosophy would require you to do it yourself, and not trust anybody else to do it for you.

 

[nereas]

... and then there's all them thar begatting.

In ancient writings, by the Hebrew prophets and by the Greek scholars, they always introduce important persons by giving an account of their genealogies first.

Herodotus does the same thing, in his Historia.

 

[nereas]

I don't see the point here.

I don't care if there is a single popularly used text in Hebrew or Greek. No single text can contain all the contradictions, emendations, and variations of the total wealth of fragments available to scholars. Any single text must be one author's (or authorial team's) decision as to which of the variations is legitimate. That means that some human is deciding which fragment is the infallible word of God and which is not.

You are right, about that. This is what happens after hundreds and thousands of years of hand-transcriptions.

But remember also, no matter how bad themselves, the Hebrew and the Greek versions are infinitely less flawed than any of the English translations.

Artscroll (c) has done a great job of compiling ancient Hebrew scripture.

And regarding the Greek versions of the New Testament, I have not found any major discrepancies amoung them, only a few minor omissions here and there.

 

[deco_martini]

JHVH is an exact Hebrew-English translation. The vowel points for this name are unknown.

And in case you did not know it, the letter "Y" which you persist in using was not even invented until about the 7th Century BC by the Greeks.

***

If you DecoMartini persist in posting your untruths, I will be forced to mute you. If that is your goal, then keep it up, buddy.

English was born in the 11th century. It is not based on Hebrew. There is no English "Y" in Hebrew, nor is there an English "J". There is no such thing as a direct Hebrew-English translation. The Hebrew character is a "yodh/yod" and the preferred English "transliteration" is the "Y" based on the oral pronunciation of the yodh.

If you've ever actually pronounced YHWH in Hebrew, you would understand why even an English Y is a "closest match" and not a direct translation.

Here is a chart to help you:
http://www.ancientscripts.com/images/hebrew.gif

Mute me if you must, it must be very hard for you to deal with.

 

[deco_martini]

You can learn Hebrew in about a year, and Greek in about two or three. There are classes available at your local community college.

And which community college taught you Hebrew and Greek?

 

[MikeFerrara]

The questions that you ask have no answers that are known.

The Jewish people have traditions that ELOHIM and JHVH are the same personage, however we are not told that definitively anywhere by Moses (Moshe) or any of the other authoritative prophets.

Those aren't the only words (or combinations of words) used in reference to God. For example various combinations are translated as God, Lord God and LORD God. If you look at what was used, how and where, you start to get some ideas concerning the why.