|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| tomato wrote: |
We are often told that the scientific impossibilities in the Bible are figurative, but we are never told what they symbolize.
The four corners of the earth are a symbol of what?
God opening up the windows of the heavens is a symbol of what?
The stars falling from the sky are a symbol of what?
The mountain where one can see all the nations of the world is a symbol of what?
Jesus returning in a cloud of glory is a symbol of what? |
Revelation saying twice that the end of the world was to happen soon is poetic for ... what? 2000+ years? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JustJohn
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Location: Your computer screen
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
This will probably be the last post I address because I feel like I'm making blindly obvious points which you continue to misconstrue, and it's getting a little frustrating.
| Justin Hale wrote: |
| Not really. You're clinging desperately to your beloved book of hate having veracity with a radically different approach to interpretation to its writers' intention and billions of other Christians for 2000 years. |
I love how you assume I am a Christian even when I've implied that I'm not. You don't have to be religious to want to give everything a fair shake. Also, I can't answer whatever the last point is because it's not clear.
| Justin Hale wrote: |
Why is it obviously figurative? The biblical writers simply weren't aware the Earth is spherical and the Earth being flat, having 4 corners (Heaven beyond) and resting on pillars seems a reasonable attempt at science given their evidence. This is an example of the Bible still being true whilst demonstrably false. We know the literal claim is false, so Christians say it's figurative, and, Voil�, the Bible isn't false, say Christians. It's figurative!  Risible folks. |
*sigh* Why can't you do your own homework on this? Very briefly: the word translated as "corners" is Hebrew word "kanaph," which generally means "extremity." In this instance it would probably be best translated as "ends of" rather than "corners of" the earth. I'm sure you're familiar with the figure of speech , which is exactly what it is. Also, the word for earth can be read as "land" in the English sense, as in "country." Here you would see that "corners" would make sense also. Again, if you actually read the verse in context this would probably be rather obvious. For the sake of my own sanity I will not go into that part.
| Justin Hale wrote: |
What Christians thought in 1455 has the utmost relevance, since it illustrates the point perfectly.
1455 Christians: Bible word of God and literally, infallibly true
2008 Christians: Bible contextual, metaphorical and still true |
Let me restate your original claim since you appear to have forgotten it. "My point is that the Bible contains numerous falsehoods and fails to mention things we now know exist." You go on to specifically mention the four corners claim, which is what I took issue with. Again, someone changing their opinion about something has no bearing whatsoever on it's truth or falsehood. This is simple logic. If you still want to claim that it is relevant to your original statement then you are saying that facts are dependent on people's opinions. This is plainly false, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.
(For what it's worth, I believe you mean to say that it is relevant to some negative claim about Christianity. This is entirely possible. However, it is clearly not relevant to your original statement like you claimed.)
| Justin Hale wrote: |
| In science and philosophy - which are as superior to religion as astronomy is to astrology - when falsehood is established, we dispense with the notion. In religion, keep belief forever. Israeli archeology debunks Exodus? Never mind, keep belief forever. Genesis totally screws up evolution? Never mind, keep belief forver. It's figurative! Earth's actual history 750,000 times longer than Bible said (and was not in fact created at the time of the Agricultural Revolution)? Never mind, keep belief forever. It's contextual and figurative! |
Again, you can continue to bring up other issues, and I will continue to ignore them. I am here to fix your misconceptions about literal interpretations. That is all.
| Justin Hale wrote: |
| The Bible is clearly a primitive attempt at science. |
I was right. This is where you went wrong. But that's another debate entirely, and one I am not getting into. Do yourself a favor and find out what the majority of historians think about that statement.
| Justin Hale wrote: |
In other words, you can't answer a simple question about Biblical interpretation. It's not a red herring. A red herring occurs when a totally different topic is introduced and a prior topic abandoned. You say biblical interpretation is to be contextual and nonliteral. I asked you to interpret Genesis' totally wrong account of the origin of the universe and of animals in the way in which you advocate one interpret the Bible. That does not a red herring make. |
I can, and simply refuse. If you were not trying to draw my attention from the original topic then perhaps it is not a red herring. However, it's still a diversion and as I said before I simply refuse to get sucked into anything else.
| Justin Hale wrote: |
How ironic that you seem to love the red herring fallacy yet your entire contribution in this thread is a red herring.
1. Justin Hale wants to talk about the dinosaurs
2. JustJohn introduces biblical interpretation
3. Dinosaurs abandoned |
Now this is the first clever thing you've said. Indeed, this seems to have had the same effect as a red herring. An astute observation. However, my intention was not to divert the topic from the dinosaurs. I was never even in on that discussion. I simply jumped in to try to keep things from getting twisted or taken out of context. I happen to be a big fan of justice.
| Justin Hale wrote: |
| Got anything worthwhile to say on the dinosaurs? What was your beloved genocidal celestial dictator thinking by having huge reptiles rule the planet for 165 million years? How ought one incorprate these facts into a theistic view of reality, do you think? Try to make any further reply in this thread address this directly. |
Nope, don't really care. Only here to see things done fairly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Justin Hale
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Location: the Straight Talk Express
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JustJohn wrote: |
| If you still want to claim that it is relevant to your original statement then you are saying that facts are dependent on people's opinions. |
1. Justin Hale argues that the Bible contains numerous falsehoods and fails to mention things we now know exist
2. Justin Hale argues the 4 corners is an example of 1
3. JustJohn disagrees with 2
4. JustJohn argues someone changing their opinion about something has no bearing whatsoever on it's truth or falsehood (that Christians changing their opinion on the 4 corners 'claim' has no bearing on the truth of that 'claim')
Care to explain your statement of the obvious and why you feel it follows I'm advocating opinions have bearing on truth?
What I've said is that Christians centuries ago believed that the world is indeed flat, since evidence for it being a sphere wasn't clear to all at the time. Christians in 2008, since it's obviously established the world is a sphere, say the 'claim' is not actually a claim at all, not truth-verifiable and therefore not false. If it's a claim, then it's a proven falsehood; if you are right that it's not a claim in the same way we use neither true nor false metaphor all the time, then I agree it's not a false claim in the same way 'walking on sunshine' is not a false claim. I fail to see why your 'If you still want to claim that it is relevant to your original statement then you are saying that facts are dependent on people's opinions' has any justification at all though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JustJohn
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Location: Your computer screen
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Since their opinions have no impact on the truth or falsehood of the claim then it is irrelevant in a discussion of the truth or falsehood of the claim. That's all.
Peace out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Justin Hale
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Location: the Straight Talk Express
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Many thanks for stating the manifestly obvious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
