• |RSS|
  • Facebook|
  • Twitter|
  • Mobile|

Hot Topics :

more topics »

Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. (JN 8:32)

RLBaty's Comments

Home > Comments
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", You reply to my message to Ketch22 with: > I think a bit of clarification is in order. > > RLBaty, your wording suggests the empirical > evidence is fact. However, I believe idoubtit8o > is correct in that the interpretation of the > evidence is also at play here. > > The logical conclusion (as I see it) is that A), > either the interpretation of the text (Bible) is ...more

    "Following",

    You reply to my message to Ketch22 with:

    > I think a bit of clarification is in order.
    >
    > RLBaty, your wording suggests the empirical
    > evidence is fact. However, I believe idoubtit8o
    > is correct in that the interpretation of the
    > evidence is also at play here.
    >
    > The logical conclusion (as I see it) is that A),
    > either the interpretation of the text (Bible) is
    > wrong, or B) the (assumptions used in making
    > the calculations in support of the) evidence is
    > wrong.
    >
    > Personally, I have to say I go with B).

    I have responded at some length to the diversions of Goldsmith (aka "idoubtit80"). If you are interested in such things, we can pursue them. Otherwise, as I recall, Goldsmith has yet to admit as much as you have; that my argument is properly constructed and that, given the stipulations, the major premise is true.

    My argument does NOT suggest that the "empirical evidence" is a fact. My argument is quite typical of such constructions and in the major premise sets forth a hypothetical where such is the case and what conclusion might follow therefrom.

    Any dispute as to whether or not some thing is older than a few thousand years old and we can so determine from the evidence is an issue for dispute when considering the minor premise, as opposed to the major premise.

    Young-earth creation-science promoters have failed in their scientific pretensions and legal challenges because folks considering their claims realize their fundamental claim that nothing is more than a few thousand years old is based upon an interpretation of a religious text that they figure trumps any evidence to the contrary.

    Is there anything else regarding the matter that you think needs "clarification"?less

    Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:54 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (2)|Report abuse (0)
  • Grassley Concludes Senate Probe of 'Prosperity' Televangelists

    Here's an excerpt from the Atlanta Journal's report on the thing: ---------------------------------------- > "We didn't evaluate each ministry > for findings of wrongdoing, as > we're not an enforcement agency," said Jill Gerber, Grassley's press secretary. > "Instead, we found the basis for a serious > stakeholder discussion of tax policy issues > that would affect ministries and ...more

    Here's an excerpt from the Atlanta Journal's report on the thing:

    ----------------------------------------

    > "We didn't evaluate each ministry
    > for findings of wrongdoing, as
    > we're not an enforcement agency,"

    said Jill Gerber, Grassley's press secretary.

    > "Instead, we found the basis for a serious
    > stakeholder discussion of tax policy issues
    > that would affect ministries and churches,
    > such as whether the parsonage tax allowance
    > should be limited for those who have multiple
    > mansions and lake houses, tax-free."

    ---------------------------------------------

    The Freedom From Religion Foundation, in a case set for trial this year, is challenging the constitutionality of the ministerial income tax free housing allowance.

    There is some indication that, despite Rick Warren, Congress is now beginning to see some of the problems with that provision of the law. Limiting the ministerial housing allowance would not remove the constitutional questions, but it is something that could be considered if there is interest in trying to preserve a housing allowance for "do-gooders" generally and eliminate the constitutional doubts about the present, "the sky's the limit", ministerial housing allowance.less

    Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:15 pm|Agree (2)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    Ketch22, You made the following comments regarding my proposed arguments and have since responded to my inquiry that you were interested in engaging in a discussion of your comments: > I (Ketch22) don't believe the premises are true. > > Anybody can say... yeah if the premises are > true then such and such... the trick is to show > a premise that is absolutely true... and you > hav...more

    Ketch22,

    You made the following comments regarding my proposed arguments and have since responded to my inquiry that you were interested in engaging in a discussion of your comments:

    > I (Ketch22) don't believe the premises are true.
    >
    > Anybody can say... yeah if the premises are
    > true then such and such... the trick is to show
    > a premise that is absolutely true... and you
    > haven't... therefore it is difficult to follow you.
    >
    > Also the conclusion doesn't have to be that the
    > text is false... it could be misinterpreted.

    We'll give that a try. I am the one who has proposed that if something is more than a few thousand years old then either (a) the text is wrong or (b) the interpretation of the text is wrong.

    So, given your comments, lets go with the argument that deals with the interpretation issue and its related stipulations:

    Major premise:

    > If (A) God's word (the text) says
    > everything began over a period
    > of six days, and
    >
    > if (B) God's word is interpreted by
    > some to mean it was six 24-hour
    > days occurring a few thousand
    > years ago, and
    >
    > if (C) there is empirical
    > evidence that some thing is
    > actually much older than a
    > few thousand years,
    >
    > then (D) the interpretation of
    > the text by some is wrong.

    Minor premise:

    > (A) God's word (the text) says
    > everything began over a period
    > of six days, and
    >
    > (B) God's word is interpreted by
    > some to mean it was six 24-hour
    > days occurring a few thousand
    > years ago, and
    >
    > (C) there is empirical
    > evidence that some thing is
    > actually much older than a few
    > thousand years.

    Conclusion:

    > (D) The interpretation of the
    > text by some is wrong.

    Basic Stipulations:

    God's word:

    > Communications from God in
    > words that are not wrong

    Interpreted by:

    > What some folks thing the text
    > means; what they think possibly
    > being wrong

    Empirical evidence that...:

    > Some thing is more than a few
    > thousand years old and we can
    > so determine from evidence
    > independent of the text

    Ketch22,

    Do you join with "Following" in agreeing with me that the argument is properly constructed and that its major premise, given the stipulations, is true?

    If not, why not?less

    Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:04 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    Daniel Paul, You are definitely due a greater condemnation for your refusal to first consider the beams in the ranks of your own kind here. Matthew 7:1,2 and James 3:1 You now write elsewhere: > RL...everytime someone sets up an ID the server > keeps track of IP. In short, your ID here on CP may > be unknown to people but CP does know your IP > address. So, why don't you come cle...more

    Daniel Paul,

    You are definitely due a greater condemnation for your refusal to first consider the beams in the ranks of your own kind here.

    Matthew 7:1,2 and James 3:1

    You now write elsewhere:

    > RL...everytime someone sets up an ID the server
    > keeps track of IP. In short, your ID here on CP may
    > be unknown to people but CP does know your IP
    > address. So, why don't you come clean about all
    > the IDs you've been and stop trying to confuse
    > the issue...

    I have come clean, as I have said.

    Why aren't you trying to work you alleged moral influence on your own kind?

    Shame on you and the Christian Post for allowing you and your kind to do what you have been doing with regard to me.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:53 pm|Agree (6)|Desagree (0)|Report abuse (1)
  • 'Generation Ex-Christian' Uncovers Why People Leave the Faith

    Daniel Paul, You are definitely due a greater condemnation for your refusal to first consider the beams in the ranks of your own kind here. Matthew 7:1,2 and James 3:1 You now write: > RL...everytime someone sets up an ID the server > keeps track of IP. In short, your ID here on CP may > be unknown to people but CP does know your IP > address. So, why don't you come clean about a...more

    Daniel Paul,

    You are definitely due a greater condemnation for your refusal to first consider the beams in the ranks of your own kind here.

    Matthew 7:1,2 and James 3:1

    You now write:

    > RL...everytime someone sets up an ID the server
    > keeps track of IP. In short, your ID here on CP may
    > be unknown to people but CP does know your IP
    > address. So, why don't you come clean about all
    > the IDs you've been and stop trying to confuse
    > the issue...

    I have come clean, as I have said.

    Why aren't you trying to work you alleged moral influence on your own kind?

    Shame on you and the Christian Post for allowing you and your kind to do what you have been doing with regard to me.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:51 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • Church Legal Expert: Minister Housing Tax Break Under Attack

    I see that USAsoccer has returned to posting, but he has not returned to deal with his problems regarding what he said here. Oh well! Consider this hot off the wire today: http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/senate-review-of-ministries-797304.html Senate review of ministries, including Long and Dollar, raises tax policy questions By Shelia M. Poole The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (...more

    I see that USAsoccer has returned to posting, but he has not returned to deal with his problems regarding what he said here. Oh well!

    Consider this hot off the wire today:

    http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/senate-review-of-ministries-797304.html

    Senate review of ministries, including Long and Dollar, raises tax policy questions

    By Shelia M. Poole
    The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

    (excerpts)

    A report for the U.S. Senate Finance Committee released Thursday sheds light on the operations of six televangelist ministries, including two in Georgia.

    The review wraps up a three-year investigation into the ministries.

    > "We didn't evaluate each ministry
    > for findings of wrongdoing, as
    > we're not an enforcement agency,"

    said Jill Gerber, Grassley's press secretary.

    > "Instead, we found the basis for a serious
    > stakeholder discussion of tax policy issues
    > that would affect ministries and churches,
    > such as whether the parsonage tax allowance
    > should be limited for those who have multiple
    > mansions and lake houses, tax-free."less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:36 pm|Agree (1)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • 'Generation Ex-Christian' Uncovers Why People Leave the Faith

    Daniel Paul, I responded to your message to me on the other thread and then noticed you alleged to have some concern about "lying" here on this one. I propose that you demonstrate the seriousness of your moral concern about such things up with your fellows here who have not ceased to "lie" about me and that in your presence. Give it a try, Daniel. I'll be looking for your demonstration a...more

    Daniel Paul,

    I responded to your message to me on the other thread and then noticed you alleged to have some concern about "lying" here on this one.

    I propose that you demonstrate the seriousness of your moral concern about such things up with your fellows here who have not ceased to "lie" about me and that in your presence.

    Give it a try, Daniel. I'll be looking for your demonstration and influence on your fellows. You know who they are.

    See other thread for further details and followup.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:22 pm|Agree (1)|Desagree (0)|Report abuse (1)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    Daniel Paul, No doubt you are one of the darlings of "Prophet", "believer", "idoubit80" and such. In case you haven't noticed, the burden is on the affirmative who has made the false claims about me. Daniel Paul, for all your self-righteous promotions, why don't you try exercising your moral influence with your misguided fellows here. I have "come clean" about my posting history here. ...more

    Daniel Paul,

    No doubt you are one of the darlings of "Prophet", "believer", "idoubit80" and such.

    In case you haven't noticed, the burden is on the affirmative who has made the false claims about me.

    Daniel Paul, for all your self-righteous promotions, why don't you try exercising your moral influence with your misguided fellows here.

    I have "come clean" about my posting history here.

    Shame, shame on you Daniel, for implying that I haven't "come clean" about my posting history here.

    Take your alleged moral influence to your fellows here and just try to get them to document whatever it is they are talking about regarding any past message here that I allegedly posted under a different ID.

    While you are at it, just try getting "believer" to "come clean" about his claim regarding such things and in confirmation that the poster here formerly known as "Mathetes" is the William Carey University instructor of religion Brian Cleveland.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:54 pm|Agree (1)|Desagree (3)|Report abuse (0)
  • Calif. War Memorial Cross Unconstitutional, Court Rules

    "DisOp", "Believer" wrote to you below as follows: > As for God speaking to us through the > Holy Spirit, He does it through His Word, > Prayer, the Church, and our Circumstances. Compare that the following posted by "believer" 3 days ago: http://www.christianpost.com/comments/believer/page5.html > From: "believer" > To: Christian Post > Date: Sunday, January 2, 2011 > Time...more

    "DisOp",

    "Believer" wrote to you below as follows:

    > As for God speaking to us through the
    > Holy Spirit, He does it through His Word,
    > Prayer, the Church, and our Circumstances.

    Compare that the following posted by "believer" 3 days ago:

    http://www.christianpost.com/comments/believer/page5.html

    > From: "believer"
    > To: Christian Post
    > Date: Sunday, January 2, 2011
    > Time: 8:35 PM MT or thereabouts
    >
    > Subject: Archaelogists...
    >
    > (excerpts)
    >
    > (T)here have been several situations
    > in my own life where God has spoken
    > to me directly, not audibly so others
    > could hear but so I could hear.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:23 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    Ketch 22, Did you want to try to do what "Following" did and discuss your comments with me?

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 7:31 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (4)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", et al: I erred regarding that earlier message from "believer" regading me. The date of the message should have been November 2 and not October 2. It is still there and I have revised my message accordingly as shown below: Here's what I would consider one of the better examples of what I have typically been faced with regarding my UNgodly, UNholy spirited adversaries here: O...more

    "Following", et al:

    I erred regarding that earlier message from "believer" regading me. The date of the message should have been November 2 and not October 2. It is still there and I have revised my message accordingly as shown below:

    Here's what I would consider one of the better examples of what I have typically been faced with regarding my UNgodly, UNholy spirited adversaries here:

    One of the most popular Christian Post posters is known as "believer".

    He has yet to "come out" and deal openly and honestly with the following false, libelous message he posted soon after I showed up here:

    http://www.christianpost.com/comments/believer/page63.html

    > From: "believer"
    > To: Christian Post
    > Date: Tuesday, November 2, 2010
    > Time: 1:28 PM
    >
    > Subject: $1K Offered...
    >
    > clover,
    >
    > rl (RLBaty) is a troll who has
    >
    >> been on CP for several years
    >> under a wide variety of IDs and
    >> he usually does the same thing.
    >
    > He appears initially to want to engage in
    > a serious mature discussion but he always
    > has another motive in mind.
    >
    > He will then begin to twist the words of
    > other posters and eventually move to
    > ridiculing and making false claims of
    > other posters until he either leaves or
    > gets thrown off of CP and then returns
    > under a new ID.

    Notice that it is addressed to "Clover".

    If "believer" would "come out" and "come clean", he might be able to then bring forth his works meet for his repentance.

    Since his posting of that message, my adversaries here, despite my denials, have been "spamming" the Christian Post with such claims regarding my history here.

    It is also the case that "believer" happens to be closely connected to the Christian Post Baptist Champion formerly known as "Mathetes" (preacher, professor, Ph.D., and currently identified as William Carey Univesrsity instructor of religion Brian Cleveland.).

    Brian has been on the run since his blundering about Peter Fosl, me and my "Goliath of GRAS".

    Brian appears to have quite a little clique here who have been quite busy trying to cover for him; with much success though I am still waiting for Brian to "come out" and "come clean".less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 7:30 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (3)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", Here's what I would consider one of the better examples of what I have typically been faced with regarding my UNgodly, UNholy spirited adversaries here: One of the most popular Christian Post posters is known as "believer". He has yet to "come out" and deal openly and honestly with the following false, libelous message he posted soon after I showed up here: > From: "beli...more

    "Following",

    Here's what I would consider one of the better examples of what I have typically been faced with regarding my UNgodly, UNholy spirited adversaries here:

    One of the most popular Christian Post posters is known as "believer".

    He has yet to "come out" and deal openly and honestly with the following false, libelous message he posted soon after I showed up here:

    > From: "believer"
    > To: Christian Post
    > Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2010
    >
    > clover,
    >
    > rl (RLBaty) is a troll who has
    >
    >> been on CP for several years
    >> under a wide variety of IDs and
    >> he usually does the same thing.
    >
    > He appears initially to want to engage in
    > a serious mature discussion but he always
    > has another motive in mind.
    >
    > He will then begin to twist the words of
    > other posters and eventually move to
    > ridiculing and making false claims of
    > other posters until he either leaves or
    > gets thrown off of CP and then returns
    > under a new ID.

    Notice that it is addressed to "Clover".

    In checking matters in order to make this response, I note that the above message from "believer" should be found in his archived messages at the following Christian Post link:

    http://www.christianpost.com/comments/believer/page112.html

    I can not now find it in the archives. If someone finds it in the archives, please let me know and I will check again.

    If "believer" would "come out" and "come clean", he might be able to confirm whether or not he deleted that message so as to obstruct justice and further evade his public responsibilities regarding this important matter; and then bring forth his works meet for his repentance.

    Since his posting of that message, my adversaries here, despite my denials, have been "spamming" the Christian Post with such claims regarding my history here.

    It is also the case that "believer" happens to be closely connected to the Christian Post Baptist Champion formerly known as "Mathetes" (preacher, professor, Ph.D., and currently identified as William Carey Univesrsity instructor of religion Brian Cleveland.).

    Brian has been on the run since his blundering about Peter Fosl, me and my "Goliath of GRAS".

    Brian appears to have quite a little clique here who have been quite busy trying to cover for him; with much success though I am still waiting for Brian to "come out" and "come clean".less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:20 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (1)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", If you are interested, I would be more than willing to consider a chat about such antics from my UNgody, UNholy spirited adversaries such as you have just observed here. Regarding Goldsmith (aka "idoubit80"), our relationship goes back a long time and is spread out throughout cyberspace. Basically, as with others here, he has simply not been able to do what you have done and in...more

    "Following",

    If you are interested, I would be more than willing to consider a chat about such antics from my UNgody, UNholy spirited adversaries such as you have just observed here.

    Regarding Goldsmith (aka "idoubit80"), our relationship goes back a long time and is spread out throughout cyberspace. Basically, as with others here, he has simply not been able to do what you have done and instead...well, you see what he's all about; as has been his fellows on the Christian Post.

    For now, I am mostly concerned with whether or not the Baptist Chamption of the Christian Post, formerly known as "Mathetes" (preacher, professor, Ph.D. and presently identified William Carey University instructor of religion Brian Cleveland) is going to return to the discussion he ran off from here and deal openly and honestly with his blundering regarding me and Peter Fosl and my "Goliath of GRAS" argument.

    And much more might be discussed, if there is interest; here, my place, or not at all.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 5:42 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (1)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", You now write: > I ("Following") never heard of "young-earth > creation-science" before I joined this duscussion. You are welcome. I'm glad I was able to open up for you a whole new world for investigation...to the extent of your time, talent and interest. As we part ways, if there is anything else you may wish to take up with me, feel free to drop a line to my own disc...more

    "Following",

    You now write:

    > I ("Following") never heard of "young-earth
    > creation-science" before I joined this duscussion.

    You are welcome. I'm glad I was able to open up for you a whole new world for investigation...to the extent of your time, talent and interest.

    As we part ways, if there is anything else you may wish to take up with me, feel free to drop a line to my own discussion list by addressing an e-mail to:

    Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com

    Or you can try to catch me here, though I keep thinking my sojourn here is coming to an end.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:21 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", I agree, our discussion has been most enjoyable and quite unlike my previous experience with certain, popular, Christian Post regulars (e.g., "believer", "Prophet", "idoubit80", and the Baptist Champion formerly known as "Mathetes" [preacher, professor, Ph.D. and presently identified as William Carey University instructor of religion Brian Cleveland]). You wrote: > I ("Follow...more

    "Following",

    I agree, our discussion has been most enjoyable and quite unlike my previous experience with certain, popular, Christian Post regulars (e.g., "believer", "Prophet", "idoubit80", and the Baptist Champion formerly known as "Mathetes" [preacher, professor, Ph.D. and presently identified as William Carey University instructor of religion Brian Cleveland]).

    You wrote:

    > I ("Following") can lean on the fact that the
    > Bible has never been proven wrong with
    > respect to any content or claim, whereas
    > man most certainly has, and will continue
    > to be so.

    Please note how that relates to our discussion and implied "presuppositions".

    Folks used to claim that the Bible intended to and did actually teach that the sun revolved around the Earth.

    Rather than give up the Bible, those who abandoned that claim decided it was just something you make reference to, a thing of man, and they gave it up as a faulty interpretation instead of a faulty Bible. Well, I guess some did give up the Bible over that.

    Young-earth creation-science is the modern geocentrism.

    Some have given up the Bible over it.
    Some have given up the young-earth creation-science interpretation over it.

    You continue to maintain a young-earth creation-science interpretation.

    Maybe you will change.
    Maybe not.

    Maybe you will give up your interpretation.
    Maybe you will give up the Bible.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:29 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (1)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", You are welcome! :o) Thanks for your participation and your part in confirming one of my fundamental points. That being that young-earth creation-science promoters and those who subscribe to their fundamental position that nothing is more than a few thousand years old do so based on their interpretation of a religious text, holding such to trump any contrary evidence. Briefl...more

    "Following",

    You are welcome! :o)

    Thanks for your participation and your part in confirming one of my fundamental points. That being that young-earth creation-science promoters and those who subscribe to their fundamental position that nothing is more than a few thousand years old do so based on their interpretation of a religious text, holding such to trump any contrary evidence.

    Briefly stated, that position is:

    > We, young-earth creation-science promoters,
    > have our interpretation of the text regarding
    > the real world and that trumps any real
    > world evidence to the contrary.

    That also helps explain another one of my points; why it is that young-earth creation-science promoters have failed in their scientific pretensions and legal challenges.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:06 pm|Agree (1)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Ketch22", And how about you. Have you now figured out that my arguments are constructed such that if their premises are true their conclusions will follow as true therefrom and that, given the stipulations and the force and effect of sound, biblical, common-sense reasoning, their major premises are true?

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:32 pm|Agree (0)|Desagree (1)|Report abuse (0)
  • Calif. War Memorial Cross Unconstitutional, Court Rules

    I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but the Opinion is available on line at: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2011-1-4-JWVopinion.pdf While the Opinion of the Court is quite lengthy, going into the history, law and such, its ultimate conclusion is briefly stated as: > Accordingly, after examining the entirety > of the Mount Soledad Memorial in context— > having considered its his...more

    I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but the Opinion is available on line at:

    http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2011-1-4-JWVopinion.pdf

    While the Opinion of the Court is quite lengthy, going into the history, law and such, its ultimate conclusion is briefly stated as:

    > Accordingly, after examining the entirety
    > of the Mount Soledad Memorial in context—
    > having considered its history, its religious
    > and non-religious uses, its sectarian and
    > secular features, the history of war memorials
    > and the dominance of the Cross—we conclude
    > that the Memorial, presently configured and
    > as a whole, primarily conveys a message of
    > government endorsement of religion that violates
    > the Establishment Clause. This result does not
    > mean that the Memorial could not be modified to
    > pass constitutional muster nor does it mean
    > that no cross can be part of this veterans'
    > memorial. We take no position on those issues.

    What the Court actually wrote about the matter is a lot more enlightening than all the rhetoric going around about the matter...in my opinion.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:28 pm|Agree (5)|Desagree (0)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", You now write: > So now I’m asking you – if things are NOT > older than a few thousand years, would > you change your interpretation of the > Biblical account? I'm not committed to an interpretation of the biblical account. The preachers I have paid the most attention to are insistent that we can know what isn't without knowing what is. So, my interest has bee...more

    "Following",

    You now write:

    > So now I’m asking you – if things are NOT
    > older than a few thousand years, would
    > you change your interpretation of the
    > Biblical account?

    I'm not committed to an interpretation of the biblical account.

    The preachers I have paid the most attention to are insistent that we can know what isn't without knowing what is.

    So, my interest has been on evaluating the claim regarding what isn't. That is that young-earth creation-science interpretations have failed because the evidence independent of their interpretation is persuasive that their interpretation, if the text indeed be the infallible word of God, is wrong.

    If nothing is more than a few thousand years old, that would not "prove" the young-earth creation-science interpretation is correct. Some of those same preachers I have paid attention to also are quite insistent that the Bible simply does not address the ultimate age of stuff such as we are discussing.

    However, if nothing is more than a few thousand years old, then, at least, the young-earth creation-science interpretation of the text would be consistent with that matter.less

    Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:15 pm|Agree (1)|Desagree (0)|Report abuse (0)
  • Atheists Declare Religions as 'Scams' in New Ad

    "Following", I thought I would post this since you indicated a certain unfamiliarity with young-earth creation-science promoters (e.g., Ken Ham, Kent Hovind, et al). Here is the relevant excerpt from Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis statement of faith: > By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence > in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid > if it contrad...more

    "Following",

    I thought I would post this since you indicated a certain unfamiliarity with young-earth creation-science promoters (e.g., Ken Ham, Kent Hovind, et al).

    Here is the relevant excerpt from Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis statement of faith:

    > By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence
    > in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid
    > if it contradicts the scriptural record.
    >
    >> Ken Ham
    >> Answers in Genesis
    >> Statement of Faith

    Fundamentally, that is why young-earth creation-science promoters reject the evidence of age independent of their interpretation of the text and reject the minor premise of the arguments I have presented for your consideration.

    And that goes to the heart of why it is that young-earth creation-science promoters have failed in their scientific pretensions and legal challenges.

    I have paraphrased their position as follows:

    > We, young-earth creation-science promoters,
    > have our interpretation of the text regarding
    > the real world and that trumps any real
    > world evidence to the contrary.

    While it's nice to have "experts" who can fuss about the technical details, the above helps the tyros like me see through the fog and understand rather clearly why it is that young-earth creation-science promoters have failed in their scientific pretensions and legal challenges.less

    Wed Jan 05, 2011 9:32 pm|Agree (1)|Desagree (2)|Report abuse (0)