Re: Preachers are not Scientists, obviously ...
- Hello Matthew,
> The child of my brain must be nourished. It has found noI pity your poor brain, suffering as it is from nourishment.
> sustenance here in many days. & etc.
- --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "mathewmaury"
> Scientists do not have all truth. I find nothing untrue inGene: Matt, there you go again. I thought you would have learned your
> the statement of the professor quoted below. Can you
> identify a particular false statement in the quote? I find
> nothing in the statement the professor should be ashamed of
> or correct.
When Robert and I REPEATEDLY pointed out to you that you cannot
always take the statements as they are listed in the text literally,
you put your head in the sand.
What statement does Matt not take literally?
"The world stands firm, never to be moved." (1 Chronicles 16:30 and
Matt believes the Earth moves, despite the clear reading of the text.
He accuses me of claiming the Bible teaches error when I do this to
him, but of course I do not.
Matt believes the earth moves BECAUSE of things he has been taught
external to the Bible which have convinced him that the reading of
that text cannot mean what it sure seems to say. It is the same thing
with Genesis 1, but he does not want to admit it.
Of course, Matt also tends to claim when this obvious conclusion is
pointed out that "Gene is putting words in my mouth...someone make
He wouldn't have to resort to that type of whining if he would face
up to the facts.
Surely, Matt would jump up to tell a preacher he is wrong if the
preacher remarked something like this on Sunday morning:
"I have no formal education in science. I've seen pictures of the
earth somewhere. Ignorant scientists try to tell us that the earth
rotates on an 'axis' and that it 'revolves' around the sun. However,
God Himself has said, 'The world stands firm, never to be moved.' (1
Chronicles 16:30 and Psalms 93:1). Anyone who claims otherwise has
bought into atheistic science and has denied God. Repent!"
Or would Matt sit in his pew and wonder..."Why don't I accept the
plain reading of Psalms 93:1 and 1 Chronicles 16:30, when I accuse
those who do the same thing in Genesis as having denied what God
said? Oh well, I don't really mind being inconsistent"
Who knows, because Matt won't answer.
- --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "lipscombgene"
>(em here) I guess I still do not get why there is all this division
> "The world stands firm, never to be moved." (1 Chronicles 16:30 and
> Psalms 93:1)
and controversy over science and religion. How do we know these
scriptures are to be taken literally? Maybe it is used as
personification showing that the world will remain unchanged
in other words, it will continue to exist until God chooses to change
or move it. This would be simply illustrating God's power and awesome
authority over the universe not a lesson in astrophysics. To me, the
Bible was never intended to be just a book of facts and rules...there
are many nuggets of truth in the symbolism.
- --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "emilyseyes795"
> --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "lipscombgene"and
> <genewright143@h...> wrote:
> > "The world stands firm, never to be moved." (1 Chronicles 16:30
> > Psalms 93:1)change
> (em here) I guess I still do not get why there is all this division
> and controversy over science and religion. How do we know these
> scriptures are to be taken literally? Maybe it is used as
> personification showing that the world will remain unchanged
> in other words, it will continue to exist until God chooses to
> or move it. This would be simply illustrating God's power andawesome
> authority over the universe not a lesson in astrophysics. To me,the
> Bible was never intended to be just a book of facts andrules...there
> are many nuggets of truth in the symbolism.Gene: Hi Em! Hope all is well. I do not necessarily disagree with you
here, but the problem is the "my way or the highway" approach many
YEC do with regard to Genesis 1. Some say if you believe the earth is
old, you're calling Jesus a liar. Others, including Matt, have
equated believing the earth is old to disagreeing with God.
Obviously, anyone who calls Jesus a liar or disagrees with God cannot
go to heaven, so in essence they are saying "if you believe things
are old, you're going to hell". Don't see any way to escape that
Now the problem for the YEC group that are in the "my way or the
highway" crowd is that they are SELECTIVELY literal and SELECTIVELY
dogmatic. The passage I quoted above should be just as literally read
and dogmatically used by this group as Genesis 1, yet because they
KNOW this is nonsense because of what they have learned from science
and the investigation of the real world, they don't maintain their
There is more than enough real world evidence for the ancient
creation of the universe and the earth (ancient here meaning much
longer than 10,000 years ago). Therefore, I am not a YEC for the same
reason Matt and other "my way or the highway" YEC are also not
If only they would realize this inconsistency.
As Lipscomb said, "For a long while, men thought that the Sun moved
around the Earth; they interpreted the Bible to say so. When the
investigation of the laws of the physical world proved that the Earth
moves around the Sun, many thought it overturned the statements of
the Bible. The theory that the Earth revolves around the Sun is
universally accepted by Bible students now and none think the theory
contradicts any statement of the Bible; indeed, there is not a
statement in the Bible concerning the movements of the Earth and the
Sun that men of science would not now use to describe them. So the
discovery contradicted no statement of the Bible. But how it extended
our conceptions of the universe and of the works and wisdom of the
Creator! It contradicted no statement of the Bible, but our
misconception of its statement."
YEC have a strong misconception of Genesis and should open their eyes
to the way things really are.
Lipscomb also said 100 years ago:
"The laws of the spiritual universe, as revealed by God, are true and
infallible; all the facts and truths stated by God concerning them
are infallibly true ... the Bible is a revelation from God to man, so
God adapts its teachings to the comprehension of men ... But we
often, by looking at these revelations from an improper standpoint,
misunderstand them, and by the investigations of science may be
called upon to revise our conclusions as to what they teach."
Matt and others should revise their conclusions about the age of
things in the same way they have revised their conclusions about
whether the earth moves or not.