The Tanager wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:12 am
TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2023 3:32 amApart from semantic fiddling with meanings of words, excuses (The Bible is not a science book) and flat denial, I see no attempt to rebut the debunks.
If you are claiming science debunks the Bible, you’ve got to show the debunking first. That is the burden of making a positive claim. And here you are simply prepping some excuses for dismissing counter arguments without having to give a rational argument. You’ll have to show (not just claim) it’s just empty semantics if you think the counter arguments that come do so. You’ll have to show they are excuses or denials.
TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2023 3:32 amNot that it hasn't been done elsewhere, but with little more of denial. possibly one of the worst I've seen is Genesis,order of creation, with the daylight (and night) appearing before the sun was even made it says. I have seen the rather 'official' Creationist excuse that the sun was made before the earth's rotation caused daylight at night, but it wasn't seen because of cloud cover (or some argue an ice shell around the earth). And one even denied the 'science' that the sen was there before the earth, but the worst was the denial that the light was day and night, which is what the Bible actually says. The worst denial is to to deny what the Bible actually says.
For this claim, you’ve got to show your interpretation of the Genesis story is the correct one. You can’t rationally dismiss something as “not what the Bible says” if you don’t support why you think the Bible actually says that and not the other interpretation(s) offered.
All I need to do is paste the text:
Gen. 1.12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.(we have the daylight already)
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Now the claim is the sun and moon and all the other planets and stars were made after there had been daylight and evening for three days already.
Explain how that works, without Interpreting by inventing stuff it doesn't say, rewriting it or denial of science, the Bible and everything. Off you go.
When you've done with that, you could try explaining how Matthew says that Joseph and his family (who clearly intended to return to Judea but were told to go somewhere else and picked Nazareth, when Luke says they lived there and went back after the birth ceremonies.
I mean, when the Bible mentions "Adam and Eve", "a flood", "the Exodus", etc, are these literal events, or not? If literal, does 'science' agree with these literal claims?
