On 13 Jan 2021 at 12:51:13 GMT, The Natural Philosopher 
wrote:

> On 12/01/2021 19:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>  On 2021-01-12, TimS  wrote:
>>
>>>  On 12 Jan 2021 at 04:50:12 GMT, The Natural Philosopher

>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>>  On 11/01/2021 22:04, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>    That nicely takes care of creation science...
>>>>
>>>>  Well no.
>>>>
>>>>  In the end conventional science versus creation science is about what
>>>>  you find the most inconceivable - a Big Bang N billion years ago in
>>>>  which a broken symmetry started time in the exact way it appears, or a
>>>>  supernal Being who dreamed it all up a few thousand years ago and faked
>>>>  it to *look like* it was N billion years old. Or whatever the current
>>>>  figure is.
>>>
>>>  If you're one of those who is going to accept that it all started  in 4004
BC,
>>>  then it would be equally valid to accept that it all started 2 seconds
ago, no
>>>  I mean 3, sorry, no hold on, 4 secs ago.
>
> Perhaps it did. As I am trying to point out, its purely a question of
> which *narrative* you *choose to believe*. And the consequences of that
> particular belief.
>
> The reason the creationists believe what they do - and I spent an
> interesting dinner party finding out, is that there is, for them, only
> One True Word, and that's in the King James Bible. All else is delusion
> inspired by the devil

So you have to believe in the Devil, for starters, an entity I don't believe
in and for which I've never seen any evidence.

And then there's King James, eh? I wonder why that one. My SWMBO, who did some
theology at Uni, says that any modern version of the Bible has been copied and
translated back and forth over the centuries by scribes with greater or lesser
degrees of care, and greater or lesser detailed knowledge of the languages
they were translating from, that you're bound to have transcription errors.
Second, you can pretty much always find a Bible passage to support and another
to oppose any particular PoV.

So it's interesting as any other history book but shouldn't be taken as the
firm unalterable direct and final Word of God. To do so is to make the same
error that the Islamists make.

--
Tim

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05