This point has already been addressed by others on this site...Deep Thought worded it best.

Oh, thanks. And here was me thinking my post had gone completely unnoticed.

Someone trained in logic please tell Stathei the name of the logical error where you attack the person rather than acknowledge what they are saying.  Isn't that what people do when they lack an intelligent response?  Again, Stathei, if all you can do is wrench my words out of context and attack them so blindly, I am still waiting for an intelligent response to my post...

It is called "ad hominem," and it is the fallacy I abhor most.

"SJ, what is pseudointellectual is your implication that you are so fluent in Hebrew that you are able to read it directly and understand it better than you can existing English translations. The icing on the pseudointellectual cake is your suggestion that others should be able to do the same. Genius."

That's it?  I understand now.  You're just ignorant.  Or, shall I say, pseudoignorant.  But I thank you for the clarification, because I really had no idea what you're talking about.

For the record, I do not think I am fluent in Hebrew, however I have a theological languages minor which did a pretty good job allowing me to interact with the text apart from translators, who after all, are humans themselves.  That was years ago now, of course.

That translators themselves often disagree should be apparent from the fifty million translations out there... I guess every single one of them being pseudointellectual, as it is certain that they think they understand it better and clearly think others should come to the same conclusion.  With the advent of the Internet, there are tools available so that even people who are not familiar with the original languages can go a long way to helping them form their own conclusions and challenge the English translations to see how well they do.

It is not pseudointellectual to point out that as the texts in question are written in another language, ultimately, the final arbiter is that language, not another translation.

So, the fact that nojc posted information from his rabbis that basically confirmed what I said meant nothing to you, did it?  

That doesn't add to my credibility?  To say something that Nojc and his blessed hyper-authoritive rabbis- definately fluent in Hebrew- also agree in makes me pseudo-intellectual, and not in fact, intellectual?

Whatever man.  You're just lazy.  You could buckle down and dig into the material yourself, but its a lot easier for you to simply dismiss it with some vague insult.

I am left wondering if my .... almost 6 years of language study followed later by 2 years of teaching Greek at the collegiate level... doesn't qualify me for making intellectual arguments, what does?  Another 6 years?

By the way, SJ, why didn't you take on my dismissal of "young earth"? You believe in it yourself, after all .

Intellectual? I don't think so.

I think I'm aware of most of the major theories, Liz. While it is understandable to invent God to explain reality, you can't invent reality to explain God. Young Earth is as credible as Holocaust denial or HIV denial, and should be treated with equal contempt.

No one really responded to this post, so I thought I would, because it has some problems.

Let me try.

The Bible was written so ancient Jewish people would understand, and thus uses language and reference the Jews of the time would actually understand. The use of "lights" (Tony's translation, of which I have no knowledge about it's validity) in reference to the sun and moon, which are indeed "lights" to the ancient Jewish mind, was expected, sensible, and probably the best course of action. It might have even been absurd at that time to say that the moon was a giant sphere of cratered rock reflecting the light of a massively more giant ball of fire.

It would have saved Galileo a lot of headaches. Seriously, why sum up an account of creation and the universe at all if you're not going to clarify anything? That was Stathei's original point. If God was supposedly communicating directly to Moses or whoever was supposed to have written Genesis, why didn't He give him more accurate information? The followers of Moses believed he talked with God. So if he had said, "Oh by the way, the sun is at the center of the solar system, all the heavenly bodies are spheres, and the moon reflects sunlight but emits no light of its own. God has told me this," they would have said, "Good to know, we'll make a note of it, now when we gonna get out of this desert holy man?" Sure, they wouldn't have particularly cared one way or the other, but at least people would know what the universe actually looked like. Instead, the whole thing is left very vague, and we get millenia of misinformation about the subject.

In any case, Genesis and the rest of the Torah/Pentateuch is a history of the God Yahweh, his creation of the Earth, and the events leading up through to the formation of Israel's (for lack of a better term to describe the tribal communities of the time) original nation; it is not an astronomy textbook.

Sadly, no, it is not.

So, if a person believes the bible, they have zero credibility in your eyes.

No, Liz, just the few nuts who believe in "Young Earth" and then try to tell me I'm full of it. Most Christians were brainwashed as children and that isn't their fault, but if you choose to believe in that crock of hilarious foolishness you are just an idiot.

SJ, some day I'm going to work out how long you must have spent reading to have read all that you claim to have done while writing books and learning Hebrew and running your website and posting 5,000 times and driving your truck and teaching and going to church. I think you must be much older than you look...

I haven't said you are full of it, either, but I tell you that I feel about the same way as you do about people who dismiss even the existence of Jesus.   Now, most atheists were brainwashed in college, and that isn't their fault, but if you choose to believe ... oh well... you get the idea.

"SJ, some day I'm going to work out how long you must have spent reading to have read all that you claim to have done while writing books and learning Hebrew and running your website and posting 5,000 times and driving your truck and teaching and going to church. I think you must be much older than you look..."

hehheh.  Well, when you begin that calculation, let me suggest that you don't approach it the way you approach every other claim you reject, that is, by assuming in advance it isn't true before you lift a finger to dig into it.  I believe I have talked about my story frequently, and you have basically mocked it.

You are absolutely right that it has been very time consuming.  However, in regards to the Hebrew thing, to be fair it was part of the minor that I was pursuing.  I didn't actually like Hebrew.  I still don't.   I let a lot of it slide, but retain enough to browse through my grammar books or the net when I need to go deeper.  

However, my point was, and still is, that if one is making arguments about words or structure in the original text, you can't merely appeal to a different translation for rebuttal.  I was worried that in regard to my what I said about the 'gap' theory that I would have to open up the Hebrew stuff again to make the case, but then Nojc came in with something from a super-rabbi validating more or less what I said.  And from my conversations with nojc, the super-rabbis are NEVER wrong.  The topic doesn't interest me enough right now to pursue it further.

I didn't say you were lazy because you didn't learn Hebrew.  Your laziness consists in beginning with your presumptions to form your conclusions and then stepping into debates where people have actually tried to conform their worldview to the evidence, but their worldview doesn't conform to your pre-conclusions.  Faced with this, you dismiss it as 'pseudo-intellectualism,' which is as lazy a way to avoid engaging an argument as I can conceive.

I note that you have never asked me why I accept a YEC.  I do note that when I said I rejected evolution while still not being a Christian, you mocked it and dismissed it as 'pseudo-intellectualism.'  In my book, that says it all.

Wow, yet another insulting post.  And does it exhibit any interest or even recognition that there may be a different way of looking at things?  Nope.

"Young earth creationism is a fundamentalist religious doctrine masquerading as scientific theory."

Is it?  Perhaps in previous encounters.  You haven't yet encountered it with me, exactly.   Besides that, there are many YECcers who do not consider it a scientific theory at all.  In fact, YEC is a broad category which includes the one you are denouncing- scientific creationism.  So, you are inaccurate from the start.  'Scientific creationism' is an attempt to formulate things in a scientific way.   Now, you can keep on yammering in ignorance battling out strawmen, or you can try to go deeper and actually understand some of the various perspectives out there.

"It has nothing whatsoever to do with "reasonable inquiry" and everything to do with Christian fervor."

Are you so sure?  I have come across both Jews and Muslims that believe in a young earth.  Are you accusing Jews and Muslims of being saturated with 'Christian fervor'?

"Outside of American Bible thumpers it is universally laughed at and treated with contempt - by Christians and other believers as much as Atheists."

What's this?  An argument ad populum?  I see.  You reject young earth creationism because you are afraid of getting laughed at, is that it?  Don't have much of a spine, eh?  Only willing to be a 'free-thinker' while you're standing in the crowd?  Don't want to get singled out now, do ya?  Coward.

I notice that you continue to harp on this while I merely was countering a statement about the literary text.  Tony N said that there was a 'gap' in Genesis 1:1-2.  I would imagine that you have no vested interest at all in whether or not Genesis really allows for anything more than a 6 day creation?  You reject the whole thing, anyway, right?  I was not arguing for a 6 day creation in my comment, only about what the text allows.  That should make no difference to you, but launching into hostile, snobby, attacks is a lot easier on something that you have already made up your mind on- YECism- and have done at least some passing investigation (I presume)- then it is to pay attention to the argument being made.

You are a key-word debater.  The overall content and context matters not.  You see a key-word and you turn off and on.  Click.  Click.  On.  Off.  Open-minded.  Closed-minded.  Click.  Click.

"I must admit I was surprised that you believe it, SJ, I hadn't realized how blinded by fanaticism you were."

Elisha doesn't accept a young earth, but I don't see anyone running over to him as being more credible in your eyes.  I think, though I don't know for sure, that Cimics is not a YECer (you certainly don't see him arguing in the evolution and creation threads), but you don't allow yourself to be persuaded by his arguments.

The fact is, if you were surprised that I might believe in a YEC, that would indicate that I had otherwise won some credibility in your eyes.  A reasonable and rational person would at least try to explore my basis for that belief, since in theory I might have well-thought out reasons for it like I try to do for my other views.  Or, if it instantly discredited me (and I hardly care, since being considered discredited by people who can't even allow for the mere existence of Jesus is hardly a blow to me), then why not favor Elisha and Cimics and their arguments?

Ah..... because none of that every really matters.  Its all just a smokescreen.  Your reasons for considering arguments incredible shift as it suits your fancy.  Whatever.  Its as transparent as all get out.

"Wow, yet another flattering post."

You started it.  Naahnaahnaah nah.  :)

"Does that make me brave in your eyes?"

It would if you allowed that I was brave in YOUR eyes for holding to an unpopular position.  But it doesn't.  I'm the fanatic, and you're the brave one.  Its completely hypocritical.  In my case, there is no reasonable way I could hold the position.  When you turn to yourself, your minority status is laudatory.  I've made it perfectly clear in multiple threads that I think reasonable people can disagree.  Cogito tried desperately, as you recall, to say that we Christians thought you atheists must be insane lunatics, but we Christians argued vehemently against that.

As you can see, the truth is that you are the one guilty of Cogito's charge.  We Christians think that reasonable people may differ.  You atheists think that we are blinded fanatics.

"You are actually the personification of young earth creationism, SJ. You are a religious fanatic masquerading as an open minded, rational, scientific thinker - even to yourself."

More flattery.  Still, I note you have not expressed any desire to find out what my position really is.  Is it in fact 'scientific creationism' which you ignorantly suppose is the same as YEC?  You don't know.  Its easier to equivocate and categorize people into manageable groups.  I know you're type.

In the next post, we can expect more blather that is identical to an accusation of 'pseudo-intellectualism.'

There is nothing fanatical with actually believing is true what you actually believe is true.

Where to begin?

I'm the fanatic, and you're the brave one.

When I asked if my unpopular beliefs made me brave in your eyes I was ridiculing your calling me a coward for supposedly following the crowd - I never suggested that I thought my opinions were brave. But you are a fanatic, SJ, and I doubt you'll deny it since you probably take it as a compliment   .

Its easier to equivocate and categorize people into manageable groups. I know you're type.

  That is your funniest line since the "original Hebrew" post. You accuse me of categorizing people and then say, in the very next sentence, "I know your type"! Pure, unadulterated, 100% GENIUS! I'm having that put on a T shirt.

PS I know there are Jews and Muslims who are Young Earth Crazies, but I was addressing Liz, Christian Young Earth Crazy, at the time. My apologies to all Jewish and Muslim Young Earth Crazies for leaving you out.