Creationist child abusers close doors

PostmodernProphet said:
uh, have you forgotten what you were arguing for?......that would be "yep....AFTER he "gathered" them he called them seas"......you were claiming they were seas all along......before he separated the land, before he separated the sky, before he created day and night......you don't get to say "yep" when the statement contradicts you.....then you have to say "oh, sorry....my bad".......
Click to expand...

It said the water divided by land or gathered as water, if you prefer, he called seas. That's what i said, dumbfuck. The water was already there as indicated previously in the Bible.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
/shrugs....my understanding is based upon a reading of the scriptures in a logical manner, following the original text and disregarding all the extraneous baggage that fundamentalists, atheists and other foggy thinkers try to impose upon it......what is bizarre is that you are as eager to impose literalism upon the text as any fundamentalist snake handling preacher......there is nothing in the text itself which is contradicted by science......

I look at what the Bible actually says and what science actually says about evolution.......l don't accept your beliefs about either when they aren't supported by the visible reality......
Click to expand...

You are not following the original text and you don't use the actual science. You are a lying scumbag who redefines words like macroevolution and was to fit your needs.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
nope....


he divided "the waters" into two parts separated by "the vault".....the part above "the vault" was called sky......obviously the "sky" has no upward limit as we say we can see stars "in the sky" to this very day.....
that part of "the waters" under the vault was gathered into one place leaving dry ground which he called "sea" and "land"......

what would "the vault" have been?......what is it we know today that causes a separation between "the sky" and that which is under it?......was creating "the vault" simply the creation of what we know today as the scientific laws such as gravity?......could "the waters" simply have been matter,existing as particles in space?......

and the gathering of "the waters" into sea and land the formation of the earth and other planets and stars?......

time then matter then energy then formation......pretty consistent with what science tells us had to be the sequence so far.....

next up?.....life.....which until this year seemed out of order......now science tells us life began out in space before the earth itself was formed....I wonder how the shepherds knew........
Click to expand...

Excellent! some totally imaginative interpretations of the bible. Now I'm starting to think that you are talking over Baxter's head. Or, he isn't willing to use his imagination and accept where you're coming from.

But you've obviously hit on the correct idea that the bible needs to be interpreted in new and more imaginative ways! This is at least an attempt by you and I don't know who else is working with it, to reconcile the bible with science. As you have relented just recently, the Dover school board ID'ers had it wrong and so it's obviously necessary that ID'ers and other rather stupid people not be careless with their new interpretations. Well done!
 
monty1 said:
Excellent! some totally imaginative interpretations of the bible. Now I'm starting to think that you are talking over Baxter's head. Or, he isn't willing to use his imagination and accept where you're coming from.

But you've obviously hit on the correct idea that the bible needs to be interpreted in new and more imaginative ways! This is at least an attempt by you and I don't know who else is working with it, to reconcile the bible with science. As you have relented just recently, the Dover school board ID'ers had it wrong and so it's obviously necessary that ID'ers and other rather stupid people not be careless with their new interpretations. Well done!
Click to expand...

it isn't a question of being new and imaginative.....its a question of going back to the original and looking at what is there instead of relying on assumptions......its like the image people have of angels having a pair of wings.....the only beings described anywhere in the Bible as having wings are the seraphim, who are said to have six....angels are only described in circumstances that show they are indistinguishable from humans.....
 
monty1 said:
Excellent! some totally imaginative interpretations of the bible. Now I'm starting to think that you are talking over Baxter's head. Or, he isn't willing to use his imagination and accept where you're coming from.

But you've obviously hit on the correct idea that the bible needs to be interpreted in new and more imaginative ways! This is at least an attempt by you and I don't know who else is working with it, to reconcile the bible with science. As you have relented just recently, the Dover school board ID'ers had it wrong and so it's obviously necessary that ID'ers and other rather stupid people not be careless with their new interpretations. Well done!
Click to expand...

The dumbass who fails to understand fractions can't possibly talk over my head and neither can you. Imagination is exactly what he is using and he has not lost me, he is just making shit up. It will not do him any good to rewrite history and pretend that the Hebrew cosmology was accurate or that his understanding of their Bible is superior to their own. It's nothing but new age bullshit mixed with psuedo science.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
so that spot was completely empty.....but something was there?.......
Click to expand...


It implies it was void of life and that is the way it was always understood. You can "imagine" new meanings for it all you like it does nothing to change the history, independent of the Bible, showing that the bible was interpreted as geocentric and with all the other nonsense I have noted.
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
so you prefer what you believe is implied over what it states?.......
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen1.pdf

literally, the earth was chaos and vacancy......
Click to expand...

I prefer what it states, the way it has been translated for thousands of years and the way it is understood by all reputable scholars now and in the past. I don't prefer the new age nonsense of a lying hack, like you.

The link does not work. Chaos and vacancy agrees with what I have said. A vacant house is empty or uninhabited, but still exists.
 
Professor Baxter said:
I prefer what it states, the way it has been translated for thousands of years and the way it is understood by all reputable scholars now and in the past. I don't prefer the new age nonsense of a lying hack, like you.

The link does not work. Chaos and vacancy agrees with what I have said. A vacant house is empty or uninhabited, but still exists.
Click to expand...

is being vacant the same as being vacancy?......

link was to the same Hebrew interlinear as before, Genesis 1...................is a scholar reputable if he thinks something which is obviously wrong?.......curious that an atheist would consider any theological scholar reputable unless he refuted the truth of Scripture......is your reliance disingenuous?...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top