🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:37:37 -0500, Antares 531
<gordonlrDELETE@swbell.net> wrote in alt.atheism:

>On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:11:52 -0500, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:23:37 -0500, Antares 531
>><gordonlrDELETE@swbell.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 00:14:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>(snip)
>>>>
>>>>I thought we were talking religion..
>>>>
>>>The Word of God is NOT in disagreement with any reliable scientific
>>>knowledge. The confusion on this is caused by the way The Word of God
>>>was given to humans. 
>>
>>Then the Bible is not the Word of God.
>>
>My apology. I worded my response a bit poorly. The confusion on this
>is/was caused by the way people misinterpret The Word of God, as it
>was given to humans. If one tries to understand The Word of God with a
>carnal mind-set, it is not likely that this person will misinterpret
>it.
>>
>>>The Word of God had to be given to us such that those primitive people
>>>could grasp the basic meaning, and also pass the information along
>>>from generation to generation among illiterate people, with little
>>>drift. Allegories, parables, similes, etc., are the way this was
>>>achieved.
>>
>>Tell that to the Christians today who worship the Bible.
>>
>I quite agree, there are many who think of themselves as Christians,
>who fail miserably in interpreting The Word of God. But, as Jesus
>said, "Those who are not against us are with us."
>>
>>>Also, The Word of God had to be given to those early humans such that
>>>they would have the same advantages that we have, today. That is, no
>>>favoritism was shown by presenting the information in a form that only
>>>a modern scientifically educated person could understand.   Gordon
>>
>>Please point to anything in Genesis that is demonstrably correct.
>
>In the beginning, God created the Heavens (multiverse) and the Earth
>(this perceivable universe). And this perceivable universe was without
>form and void (it had neither form nor void. It was just a point). 

That is not what the writers were saying.

>Then the big bang occurred and this perceivable universe was under
>way. But, there was no light, initially. It was just a quark soup with
>no source of photons.
>
>And so on through the whole sequence......
>
>Gordon