Oliver, Aslan is making a sad attempt to get into a position the thread so he can say that moral codes can only come from his God. Only his god has the right to impose his will.

You know the one that made the world around six thousand years ago and everyone and everything lived in happy harmony until that evil snake came walking (yes walking) along. Remember Aslan is the greatest intellect the world has ever know, he knows the truth never mind all those all those nasty scientist, never mind all those heretical biblical scholars, and lets not even mention any other religions. Aslan is as all knowing as that god he talks about anything that doesn’t agree with his world view must be wrong. There is simply no question that a little thing like evidence may change his worldview, not like that flaky science stuff how can you have moral certainty when you keep changing the story.

But then again I’m a Atheists and we know what the bible says about Atheists

Kenny,

For someone with your understanding of science, it is not surprising that you think GB's understanding of science is "astounding"

BTW, what is the value of pi? You never answered.

Philo,

No need to post difference between what Bible says and what AIG (and others) say re creation. AIG believes what the Bible says.

Neohuman,

Spong is not a Bible scholar or any scholar for that matter. No-one (except media outlets) takes him seriously. We can tell the difference between poetry, midrash and actual historical events by analysing the form and style of the text. Eg. we know that Genesis is historical narrative, because we can see a pattern of beginning qatal (perfect) verb forms followed by a progression of wayyiqtol (waw-consecutives imperfect) forms. These grammatical markers (along with several other markers) are indicative of classical Hebrew historical narrative. That Spong thinks much of the NT is midrash just reinforces the fact that he has no idea what he is talking about.

Here are a couple of good articles explaining Midrash:
http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/wcas/midrash.htm
http://www.moriel.org/sermons/uses_abuses_midrash.htm

Oliver,

you said: "Sorry, Aslan, I really can’t see such an event not being recorded elsewhere in the world. (Yes, I know about argument from silence.)"

Are you being disingenuous Oliver - or just not paying attention?
How many times have I explianed that even if we assume that the Chinese simply had to record such an event, it would most likely have been destroyed along with the majority of ancient astronomical observations as Keenan points out.

A bat is not a bird.
Aslan provide endless hours of entertainment to all, you wouldn’t have a clue what my knowledge of science is. I’ll tell you one thing it is enough to know that pi is not 3.

Had any astrological readings lately Aslan? Did they tell that the earth was flat (Isaiah 40:22) Aslan as has been said before, religious mems are a evolutionary deadend.

Aslan,

BOOK BURNING GENERALLY:

Thank you for the site. Nonetheless, I know much of this history. It goes to show records do survive purges Christian and Non-Christian, alike.

CHINA:

The records would have survived for several reasons:

1. Astronomy is a unification technology valuable to the State
2. Knowledge was protected familially by Court Astronomers
3. Documents were secreted
4. Ancient China had a Diaspora – Reach.
5. Many Shang records would have been already old and buried (missed destruction) and recently discovered

Moreover, Keenan appears to be an Astronomer not an historian.

I don’t feel any reasonable person would believe it irrelevant the Shang recorded Novae, when we are reviewing the capacity of the Shang to record such events. Think, these stars explode and disappear within a few days, the bones can’t be forgeries. It has only been in the last fifty-years or so, we have had the capacity to verify the data, which is convincingly confirmed.

One can’t see a society based largely around celestial mechanics and the calendar would not record the event and protect the record. Were your world run over by the Grand Unification Dynasty of Kenny, are you going to destroy all copies of the Bible - of course not.

HITLER & CO:

Right and wrong are moral concepts. Power is a political expression. So, “might is right” does not gain traction. The people in power after WWII were able to exercise that power. The Locus of Power for the Soviet and the Locus of Power for the West were different. Stalin and the People, respectively. Stalin had the power to exercise his opinion. Democracies exercised popular opinion. After being caught, the accused had little say in the matter beyond a Court Room defence. On the gallows, war criminals have opinions. In executing war criminals, the court is acting in accordance with its collective opinion. Is that right? Well, it’s a matter of opinion. :-)

GOSPEL

Now it is your turn: You can start with stating under what conditions would you rip out and replace a gospel. Which gospel is the least reliable? Thanks.

Aslan,
I recognise the practise of your faith and your good character above how we might individually view certain beliefs, or events of history. I agree, the views of Spong do not resemble a Christian view, but the religion of Spong.

I can appreciate your defence of AIG but their view of Romans 5: 12 is a misrepresentation. Here are extracts from my 30 page article:

To evaluate the text of Genesis 2: 17 where it says, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shall not eat of it: for in the day that you shall eat of it, you shall die". I ask the question: In the terms of Genesis 2: 17 "in the day" - when did Adam die, and what was the nature of that death that we also inherited as mentioned in Romans 5: 12 – 21. Conversely what is the nature of the “new life” we now receive from Christ?

The Apostle Paul states in Acts 17: 24 – 27 that God determined each man’s time and place in history, so it wasn’t Adam who determined the length of his organic life span by his sin. The very fact that Adam survived 930 years after Eden meant he had a fair innings in an organic body. So the "death" recorded as "on that very day" mentioned in Genesis 2: 17 hardly applies to his organic death, even as the opening of his eyes did not apply to his natural sight (Gen 3: 7)... The substance of the breath was not oxygen as all other living creatures had already received; it was in fact the very spiritual and moral nature of God.

The literal Hebrew text of Genesis 2: 17 says, “in your dying you shall die” completely dead, twice dead (Jude 12 +) and refers to man as a total being. The text records the word twice and the second death is the eternal death of the spirit. Even as Cain was in his spirit dead, though he roamed the Earth.

Aslan not sure where Spong sits but many different sources Jewish, Christian and others come up with the same conclusion that the Bible cannot be used as a reliable historical source he isn't doing too bad.

Trouble with my link your link is that it doesn’t give the weight of authority(yes I know the fallacy) qualification and where it stands in relation to others who study that and similar fields. Any loon can trade links, lets try the Raelians. Now for arguments sake you were a Raelian if the only sources of info you chose where those that upheld the Raelian viewpoint trading links won’t get you anywhere because you will have no idea that the Raelian stance is so at odds with so many academic disciplines and evidence to make it nonsensical just by looking at a few links.

As a lay-non Raelian I don’t have the time to go through their arguments the best I can do is look at their stance within the framework of current human knowledge and academic disciplines as I do with all religious traditions. I don’t suspend by scepticism for them so why should I do that for you, you certainly don’t afford other religious traditions the same latitude towards evidence and the laws of physics.

I won’t debate or trade links with a creation science advocate, anyone who will argue that the Earth is only 6000 years old and that dinosaurs strolled with humans are under a severe case of confirmation bias and there is no amount of evidence alone will change their minds.

Now if you are trying to argue that God could stop the laws of physics and give the earliest day light saving and BTW no other civilization happened to notice it when they noticed comets eclipses etc it’s not looking good.

BTW are you or Boaz going to post on that slavery link?