Creationists suffer another legal defeat

[THE LIGHT]

Each individual that reads it. Did you not decide what parts of the bible are to be taken literally and which are to be takes as parable or did you allow some other person interpit it for you? Leaving your faith to another's interpretation would be dangerous in my mind, what would be their motivation to interpret it for you?

I take the Bible seriously.

so you agree with god that slavery is ok?

you think women should be subservient?

you think homosexuals and adulterers should be executed?

you think NOBODY has a right to worship any god but YOUR god?

you think YOUR brain should get to decide for EVERYONE?

I never said that.

 

[AllieBaba]

You'll have to forgive dikrules. He just randomly attributes bizarro things to people who call him out, and thinks everyone is so stupid they don't see what he's doing.

 

[pinqy]

I take the Bible seriously.

so you agree with god that slavery is ok?

you think women should be subservient?

you think homosexuals and adulterers should be executed?

you think NOBODY has a right to worship any god but YOUR god?

you think YOUR brain should get to decide for EVERYONE?

I never said that.

But if you don't follow those prescripts, then you're deviating from a plain interpretation of the Bible and/or picking and choosing certain parts over others.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Light is simply a lukewarm Christian that the Lord will spew out on judgment day. Yes, by everything he has written in this thread, he does believe in women obeying men, the stoning of adulterers and homosexuals, the worshiping of one (his) God, etc.

I am glad that he has accepted the Creationism is not science.

 

[rdean]

I take the Bible seriously.

so you agree with god that slavery is ok?

you think women should be subservient?

you think homosexuals and adulterers should be executed?

you think NOBODY has a right to worship any god but YOUR god?

you think YOUR brain should get to decide for EVERYONE?

I never said that.

The question is, "Do you believe it"?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course, he does, RDean, but he is being lukewarm and won't admit it.

 

[THE LIGHT]

the brain thay processes logic and facts
the brain that uses research and investigation

NOT the brain that relies on FAITH in MYTH

I see, you don't mean trust our brains you mean trust YOUR brain. After all, everyone thinks that THEIR brain is the correct one but my brain tells me you rely on myth and your brain tells me I rely on myth. Now what?

no
I don't mean that at all

I mean what I said;

your method; faith in a god that doesn't exist
belief in a religion that is more full of holes than a swiss cheese

the method I prefer:
MEN and women analyze
investigate
reseach
contemplate
compare notes
do studies

certainly I trust my brain more than I trust your mindless belief

You said no and then finished by agreeing with my analysis.

Again, I know you chose to believe in your own brain but which brain do we trust if we both think the others theory is hog wash?

 

[FA_Q2]

I see, you don't mean trust our brains you mean trust YOUR brain. After all, everyone thinks that THEIR brain is the correct one but my brain tells me you rely on myth and your brain tells me I rely on myth. Now what?

no
I don't mean that at all

I mean what I said;

your method; faith in a god that doesn't exist
belief in a religion that is more full of holes than a swiss cheese

the method I prefer:
MEN and women analyze
investigate
reseach
contemplate
compare notes
do studies

certainly I trust my brain more than I trust your mindless belief

You said no and then finished by agreeing with my analysis.

Again, I know you chose to believe in your own brain but which brain do we trust if we both think the others theory is hog wash?

Actually, no that was not what he did. As have been pointed out by many, you have yet to provide ANY scientific evidence for your claim whatsoever. Then, to hide the fact you had none, you requested evidence from us. I provided some of that evidence which you promptly ignored existed and changed your claim. Now you are miraculously claiming that you use evidence that you somehow have been unable to locate and give us.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let's re-emphasize this: The Light has provided NO evidence that Creationism is science and has provided NO evidence that Evolution is not science.

 

[antagon]

so you agree with god that slavery is ok?

you think women should be subservient?

you think homosexuals and adulterers should be executed?

you think NOBODY has a right to worship any god but YOUR god?

you think YOUR brain should get to decide for EVERYONE?

I never said that.

But if you don't follow those prescripts, then you're deviating from a plain interpretation of the Bible and/or picking and choosing certain parts over others.

perhaps you've not read the bible? one would have to take great liberties interpreting the bible to arrive at such a list of beliefs. there's an argument that fundies got it all wrong and then there's bullshit. attributing that list to the bible is the latter.

 

[pinqy]

I never said that.

But if you don't follow those prescripts, then you're deviating from a plain interpretation of the Bible and/or picking and choosing certain parts over others.

perhaps you've not read the bible? one would have to take great liberties interpreting the bible to arrive at such a list of beliefs. there's an argument that fundies got it all wrong and then there's bullshit. attributing that list to the bible is the latter.

Leviticus has many rules about treatment of slaves. Paul has advice to slaves. Nothing in the Bible speaks against slavery.

The OT rules for women are clearly different than those for men, putting women in a subservient role. And Paul was also quite clear on the matter that women have a lesser place.

The OT rules for Blasphemy and adultery are quite clear.

The First Commandment is quite clear about worshipping other gods.

Where's the interpretation? Surely you're familiar enough with the Bible that I don't need to quote chapter and verse?

 

[THE LIGHT]

But if you don't follow those prescripts, then you're deviating from a plain interpretation of the Bible and/or picking and choosing certain parts over others.

perhaps you've not read the bible? one would have to take great liberties interpreting the bible to arrive at such a list of beliefs. there's an argument that fundies got it all wrong and then there's bullshit. attributing that list to the bible is the latter.

Leviticus has many rules about treatment of slaves. Paul has advice to slaves. Nothing in the Bible speaks against slavery.

The OT rules for women are clearly different than those for men, putting women in a subservient role. And Paul was also quite clear on the matter that women have a lesser place.

The OT rules for Blasphemy and adultery are quite clear.

The First Commandment is quite clear about worshipping other gods.

Where's the interpretation? Surely you're familiar enough with the Bible that I don't need to quote chapter and verse?

Yes, Paul was quite clear on the matter...

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
-Galatians 3:26-28

 

[pinqy]

Yes, Paul was quite clear on the matter...

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
-Galatians 3:26-28

Ok, perhaps not so clear:

1 Cor 14:34,35

34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

(I do note that 1 Cor 7:4 says that the wife belongs to the husband and the husband to the wife, but that appears to mean as far as sex and not status.


1 Tim 2: 9-15

9 I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,

10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.

12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Eph 5:22-25

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

(Note that wives must submit, husbands must love...Colossians 3 repeats this advice)

Titus 2:3-5

3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good.

4 Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children,

5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.

And while we're in Titus, might as well talk about slaves:
Titus 2: 9,10

9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,

10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.

Where's the interpretation? The verse you offered is clearly poetical, while the ones I've shown are clearly meant to be practical.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Kudos to all for demonstrating The Light does not have a basic understanding of the Bible, its principles, Creationism/ID, and Evolution.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Ok, perhaps not so clear:

To you, yes.

1 Cor 14:34,35
34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
(I do note that 1 Cor 7:4 says that the wife belongs to the husband and the husband to the wife, but that appears to mean as far as sex and not status.


1 Tim 2: 9-15


Eph 5:22-25
(Note that wives must submit, husbands must love...Colossians 3 repeats this advice)

Titus 2:3-5
3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good.

4 Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children,

5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.

Don't forget that men are asked to love their wives and respect their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it. In other words men are to not only love their wives in lip service only but also they are to lay down their lives for their wives. This could be both literally or figuratively, but looking at it in the figurative sense, it can be viewed as the equivalent to serving your wife because you are laying aside "your life" for your wife. So the command is mutual. After all, the Bible considers man and woman to be ONE when married which is what the 1 Cor 14 is considering since it is talking about married women.

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
-Genesis 2:24


When Moses petitioned G-d on behalf of the daughters of Zelophehad because they were not to be given their father's inheritance because there were no sons in the family and G-d answered in their favor to be given the inheritance over any other men.

Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph: and these are the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah. -2 And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, -3 Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the LORD in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin, and had no sons. -4 Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son? Give unto us therefore a possession among the brethren of our father. -5 And Moses brought their cause before the LORD. -6 And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying, -7 The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them. -8 And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.

Numbers 27:1-8

Also note that Jesus (G-d in the flesh) chose to reveal himself to women FIRST before the men.

Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene...
-Mark 16:9

Please note that it was also a woman that brought our Saviour into this world.


If you are still concerned about how women are treated you may want to listen to this. Some of Ravi's points are redundant with mine.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fpmu42g6mDs&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube - Atheism, Feminism, and the Bible[/ame]

I challenge you to find womanhood esteemed as highly in any other religion as it is in Christianity.

And while we're in Titus, might as well talk about slaves:
Titus 2: 9,10
9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,

10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.

Do you have a problem with employees treating their employers with respect? You have to understand that what we call a slave today is not necessarily what Paul was addressing here. In NT (and OT) times people sometimes chose to become slaves in order to have their needs provided or to pay off a debt. Similar to minimum wage today, but with a long term contract. There were also set rules for the masters on how they were to treat their slaves (employees if you will) which I see you have conviniently left out of your post. (Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1)

"And if thy brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee. And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him."
-Deuteronomy 15:12-14


Imagine that! you are suppose to let him go after six years and to GIVE him what? GIVE to him LIBERALLY and BLESS him.

On the other hand, the type of slavery we often think of today associated with the round up and the abduction of Africans is that of manstealing which IS condemned both the New and Old Testament.

But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
-1 Timothy 1:8-10

And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
-Exodus 21:16

It is a sin that has obviously come home to roost in America these last few decades. IMO

So is slavery condemned in the Bible? Depends on what you define the term "slavery" as.

Where's the interpretation? The verse you offered is clearly poetical, while the ones I've shown are clearly meant to be practical.

You are clearly confused or deliberately attempting misunderstand.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Kudos to all for demonstrating The Light does not have a basic understanding of the Bible, its principles, Creationism/ID, and Evolution.

 

[THE LIGHT]

no
I don't mean that at all

I mean what I said;

your method; faith in a god that doesn't exist
belief in a religion that is more full of holes than a swiss cheese

the method I prefer:
MEN and women analyze
investigate
reseach
contemplate
compare notes
do studies

certainly I trust my brain more than I trust your mindless belief

You said no and then finished by agreeing with my analysis.

Again, I know you chose to believe in your own brain but which brain do we trust if we both think the others theory is hog wash?

Actually, no that was not what he did. As have been pointed out by many, you have yet to provide ANY scientific evidence for your claim whatsoever. Then, to hide the fact you had none, you requested evidence from us. I provided some of that evidence which you promptly ignored existed and changed your claim. Now you are miraculously claiming that you use evidence that you somehow have been unable to locate and give us.

No, you are way off. Konradv made a statement that we should trust our brains. Therefore my question which still remains unanswered is "who's brain do we trust?"

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Light continues to fail.

All know this.

The Light is shallowly and merely engaged in the immorality of stubbornness: he won't admit he's wrong. That's OK. That stands as a testimony against him.

 

[froggy]

Creationists suffer another legal defeat | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

once again math and common sense wins

God doesn't care what mankind says about him or his creation, one day they will answer to him, woe are they.

 

[Gadawg73]

Creationists suffer another legal defeat | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

once again math and common sense wins

God doesn't care what mankind says about him or his creation, one day they will answer to him, woe are they.

Froggy, if the Bible said God did not create the earth would you believe that?