|
- 帖子
- 110
- 精華
- 0
- 威望
- 16
- 魅力
- 0
- 讚好
- 0
|
77#
發表於 2005-10-23 11:11 AM
| 只看該作者
justin_lun兄,
好一句"挪亞方舟亦只是研究方向﹐更加未被認為是史實﹐又如何混淆歷史﹖"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/noah.aspAlthough biblical skeptics often dismiss this account as pure mythology, Christians should accept the word of God Who was there rather than the opinions of fallible men who were not. Liberal Biblical scholarship concludes that the Biblical account was based upon Mesopotamian models. A majority of Christian Fundamentalists believe that the prevalence of the story points to its origin in an actual, historical event. They argue that the high level of detail given in Genesis makes it an inherently reliable account, and that the other stories are accounts of the same historical event which were distorted into mythology over time. They claim that the Epic of Gilgamesh is merely a corrupted retelling of Genesis (though this is rejected by liberal biblical historians and archaeologists, who regard Genesis as having been written considerably later than Gilgamesh).
乜嘢"研究方向"會叫人晌作出研究之前接受"研究結論"?
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/Day5pmsession.pdf
(page 94-96)Q. What about Adam as the first man?
A. Even the Hebrew Bible uses the notion of Adam in the universal sense for mankind.
Q. Does the church believe that Adam was actually the first man?
A. The church believes in these ideas only in connection with the doctrine of original sin, and that means simply that all of us are born into a world that's pretty messed up and we are all contaminated by that and we need redemption from. The key point of the whole virgin birth idea, Adam and Eve, is to emphasize, to make a place cognitionally to understand the meaning of what we call the Savior or theme of redemption.
Q. So they're just --
A. Everything is focussed in that way. So to ask atomistically questions like, do you believe in the virgin birth, do you believe in Adam and Eve, is to miss the whole point theologically.
Q. But the church believes that, does it not?
A. The church is primarily interested in communicating to people the salvific significance of the man Jesus. And throughout the ages it does this in many different ways, and sometimes it has to revive and revise catechisms in order to make that mission something that can be accomplished.
Q. What about Eve, do you believe there was a woman named Eve?
A. That's the same sort of question.
Q. So Adam and Eve to you are not individuals?
A. I don't look for scientific information. I don't look for scientifically factual information in a text which, by genre, fits in the category of what all biblical scholars today call myth rather than history.
Q. I didn't ask you for a scientific explanation. You're a theologian. As a matter of faith, do you believe --
A. You're asking a historical question, and the whole concept of history, as we understand it today,was in many ways fashioned by the scientific revolution with its concern for factual evidence. So history is not able to be disassociated from the whole scientific movement.
但係唔知點解﹐基督徒唔安份於"相信" - 佢哋需要證實﹐需要用證據去證明聖經唔單止係神話﹐而係事實。
用舊約既字眼製造成無稽既Heliocentrism推翻天文學說。
用YEC既半咸淡理論去推翻考古學﹐地質學﹐同生物學既理論。Flood geology, a doctrine advanced by young-earth creationists, holds that the global flood of Genesis actually occurred and that many geological formations of today are best explained in terms of a global flood in the recent past. This includes phenomena such as submarine river canyon extensions, layered fossil fuel deposits, fossil layers, and layered sedimentary strata. Biology as understood by creationists holds that the animals on the ark were representatives of the created kinds, not representative of every species known to modern taxonomy. These 'kinds' had significantly more genetic information and a significantly superior genetic structure than the animals of today, and that speciation from these 'kinds' followed the flood as a result of reproductive isolation and loss of genetic information. Although it is unknown exactly how animal 'kinds' relate to modern taxonomic classifications, the creation narrative in Genesis indicates that a 'kind' is a category that was reproductively isolated from other 'kinds'.
你既所謂"現時考古隊尚未有足夠科技開發挪亞方舟所在的亞拉獵山﹐只能發掘表面的碎木﹐證明與方舟建造時間吻合。"係謊言。In 2004, yet another expedition went to Mount Ararat in Turkey to try to locate the Ark (formerly in Armenia)- see Ararat anomaly. Samples from Turkey tested by Geological and Nuclear Sciences, a New Zealand government research institute, were found to be volcanic rock rather than petrified wood.
呢0的係基督教既一貫作風 - 假裝研究﹐實質暪騙。 |
|
