Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
2,219 bytes added ,  10:01, March 5, 2008
→‎Suggestions: Logically fallacious
Line 84: Line 84:  
::::: With ''those'' annotations, yes.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:42, 5 March 2008 (EST)
 
::::: With ''those'' annotations, yes.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:42, 5 March 2008 (EST)
 
::::::What is your issue? Are they factually incorrect, or do you simply disagree with the opinion presented? [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 00:50, 5 March 2008 (EST)
 
::::::What is your issue? Are they factually incorrect, or do you simply disagree with the opinion presented? [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 00:50, 5 March 2008 (EST)
 +
::::::: More like logically fallacious.  Here's an analysis of a few from Genesis 1[http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/1.html]:
 +
:::::::* "''(1:1-2:3) The Genesis 1 account conflicts with the order of events that are known to science.''":  This is really a case saying "My view is right, your's is different, so yours is wrong".  That's the fallacy of begging the question.  The same applies to the next two points for the same verses, so I'll skip them.
 +
:::::::* "''(1:3-5, 14-19) ... God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day''":  So?  Is this trying to claim that God cannot make light by any other means?  Given that even us humans can, this is a ludicrous claim.
 +
:::::::* "''And how could there be "the evening and the morning" on the first day if there was no sun to mark them?''":  Quite easily.  To mark the days you need a rotating Earth and a source of light.  The account already mentions that there was a source of light, so what's the problem?
 +
:::::::* "''God spends one-sixth of his entire creative effort (the second day) working on a solid firmament. This strange structure, which God calls heaven, is intended to separate the higher waters from the lower waters.''":  The Bible says nothing about a "solid firmament".  This is an invention, probably due to a misunderstanding of what the Hebrew for "firmament" means.  It has nothing to do with "firmness".
 +
:::::::* "''(1:11-13) ... Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes ''":  So?  There's two answers to this.  First, there was already ''light'', and that's what the plants need, not the sun specifically.  Second, they had to survive 24 hours without the sun!  Wow!  How long do the Skeptics think a plant can survive without light?
 +
::::::: That's enough to give you an idea.  I skipped a few, mainly because the explanations would have been a bit longer.  But essentially, they've said ''nothing'' accurate in those first few.  The annotations have no credibility.
 +
::::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 05:01, 5 March 2008 (EST)
    
== Correction and authorship ==
 
== Correction and authorship ==
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu