dvunkannon
Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008
|
| Quote (Badger3k @ Dec. 01 2009,00:37) | | Quote (RDK @ Nov. 30 2009,17:44) | | Quote (Dr.GH @ Nov. 30 2009,16:35) | | Quote (RDK @ Nov. 30 2009,08:15) | [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/education/william-dembskis-interview-on-new-book-the-end-of-christianity-finding-a-good-god-in-an-ev
il-world/#comment-341511]Right.[/URL]
And if that wasn't enough, here's a juicy one from [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/education/william-dembskis-interview-on-new-book-the-end-of-christianity-finding-a-good-god-in-an-ev
il-world/#comment-341523]vjtorley:[/URL]:
| Quote | | I have one question though, relating to animal suffering, which the book does not appear to address: has Dr. Dembski ever expressed an opinion regarding the possibility of some sort of afterlife for animals? The reason why I ask this if there is no afterlife for them, then we have a wrong (the suffering of innocent animals) that is never righted in the grand scheme of things. |
I thought animals didn't matter, seeing as how humans are not animals and are a separate "kind" altogether? |
To a literalist, every single word in the Bible must be true (except the hard parts they ignore). There is a Genesis exception of animals that are "clean" and those that are not. The "Clean" animals are suitable for sacrifice because they are ensouled, or "nepish." So, if you are "nepish" you get an afterlife. |
Nepish? Sounds dirty.
I think I might throw my sock back on and engage in a healthy conversation with the IDiots using this newfound information. For example, how does one tell the difference between ensouled animals and non-souled animals today? I did a quick search and, strangely, the Bible was uncharacteristically vague on the topic, sometimes even contradicting itself:
| Quote |
Deuteronomy 14:19
And every creeping thing that flieth is unclean unto you: they shall not be eaten. |
| Quote |
Leviticus 11:21-23
Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you. |
I'm eager about the abomination listed in the above passage (flying creeping things which have four feet). Anybody know of such a creature? And sorry, Robert Byers doesn't count.
Edit: moar sources:
http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/booklets/clean/animals.html |
So, locusts have four feet? And "legs above their feet" - what the hell does that even mean? They don't walk upside-down? They have feet that are attached to legs that stick out sideways and do not go above their feet (they swim with legs like pontoons?) - WTF?
Are there animals with feet but no legs? What if they have no feet - can we eat amputees?
What does "...the locust after his kind" mean - locusts can only eat other locusts, or you have to be a locust to eat one? |
"after his kind" meant that only particular species were allowed. The text doesn't say what those are, it was part of the oral tradition that accompanied the text. Some Yemenite Jews held that they knew the correct species and ate locusts into the 20th century.
--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima
|
