Biblical Biology, Genesis 30:37-42

[thomas t]

This is a very popular atheist video on youtube
It's a reflection of the Jacob story.

Biblical Baby Mamas



According to the video (minute 8:40 ff.) , Jacob "used the [...] concept of getting animals to look at white branches while they mated so that they would produce white streaked offspring."



In my opinion, this is a misrepresentation of what the author calls Biblical Biology.
In Genesis 31:9 Jacob explains - God is the author of this in a situation of unsolved conflict. Not the method.

So in my opinion, the equation is: God + a method = offspring. This equation only applies to situations in which there is no standard way of solving conflicts, such as presenting the issue to the whole community, I think.

I think, it's not the branch. In a situation in which standard ways of solving conflicts aren't availabe but God being with you... you could use no matter what method to get the offspring. This is at least my opinion on the matter.

 

[exchemist]

This is a very popular atheist video on youtube
It's a reflection of the Jacob story.

Biblical Baby Mamas



According to the video (minute 8:40 ff.) , Jacob "used the [...] concept of getting animals to look at white branches while they mated so that they would produce white streaked offspring."

View attachment 45783

In my opinion, this is a misrepresentation of what the author calls Biblical Biology.
In Genesis 31:9 Jacob explains - God is the author of this in a istuation of unsolved conflict. Not the method.

So in my opinion, the equation is: God + a method = offspring. This equation only applies to situations in which there is no standard way of solving conflicts, such as presenting the issue to the whole community, I think.

I think, it's not the branch. In a situation in which standard ways of solving conflicts aren't availabe but God being with you... you could use no matter what method to get the offspring. This is at least my opinion on the matter.

Why waste your time arguing against idiot videos, though?

 

[thomas t]

Why waste your time arguing against idiot videos, though?

As fas as I know, it's the second most popular atheist video online... and last time I posted one of the videos of the same author and made a poll, it was widely accepted as a useful video by the atheists of this board.

Click here If Man Obeyed God

So now, I'm curious as to see what they say now.... is this video completely idiotic in their view or does it point something out that they think is truthful about the Bible?

 

[ChristineM]

As fas as I know, it's the second most popular atheist video online...

What is an atheist video?
Was there a questionnaire involved to answer by viewers to identify their faith ot lack of it?
Do you actually understand what atheism actually is?

it was widely accepted as a useful video by the atheists of this board.

I am not sure "widely" is an appropriate or honest word. I have just revisited the thread and it seems the vast majority of those who identify as atheists had other views

 

[thomas t]

What is an atheist video?

I meant a video promoting atheism

 

[ChristineM]

I meant a video promoting atheism

So they though? Or just your idea of atheism?

I have watched both and found them rather irrelevant to atheism bot more a critique of biblical scripture.

 

[thomas t]

So they though? Or just your idea of atheism?

I have watched both and found them rather irrelevant to atheism bot more a critique of biblical scripture.

ok, but they call themselves atheist, in line 3 they call their videos "atheistic animations":
https://www.youtube.com/c/DarkMatter2525
I think it was an atheistic animation.
Speaking from my experience, atheists in the fourms occasionally quote this channel to bring their thoughts accross. They use this channel even more than they use Richard Dawkins qoutes or other outspokenly atheist sources.

 

[ChristineM]

ok, but they call themselves atheist, in line 3 they call their videos "atheistic animations":
https://www.youtube.com/c/DarkMatter2525
I think it was an atheistic animation.
Speaking from my experience, atheists in the fourms occasionally quote this channel to bring their thoughts accross. They use this channel even more than they use Richard Dawkins qoutes or other outspokenly atheist sources.

Of course anyone can call themselves an atheist, there are as many different types of atheist as there are atheists, we are all different with different views. The only thing that binds us as a group is varying disbelief in god or gods.

By his own admission Dawkins isn't an atheist but considers himself an agnostic. As to why not many atheists follow him, many consider he does a disservice to atheist. But he does seem popular among christians who quite his work at atheists like its their bible

 

[Audie]

So they though? Or just your idea of atheism?

I have watched both and found them rather irrelevant to atheism bot more a critique of biblical scripture.

A minute of the first one was all the childish garbage I could take.

 

[Audie]

Of course anyone can call themselves an atheist, there are as many different types of atheist as there are atheists, we are all different with different views. The only thing that binds us as a group is varying disbelief in god or gods.

By his own admission Dawkins isn't an atheist but considers himself an agnostic. As to why not many atheists follow him, many consider he does a disservice to atheist. But he does seem popular among christians who quite his work at atheists like its their bible

The only people I have EVER seen mention this " Dawkins" on a forum have been the religious ones, especially fundys.

 

[Polymath257]

This is a very popular atheist video on youtube
It's a reflection of the Jacob story.

Biblical Baby Mamas



According to the video (minute 8:40 ff.) , Jacob "used the [...] concept of getting animals to look at white branches while they mated so that they would produce white streaked offspring."

View attachment 45783

In my opinion, this is a misrepresentation of what the author calls Biblical Biology.
In Genesis 31:9 Jacob explains - God is the author of this in a situation of unsolved conflict. Not the method.

So in my opinion, the equation is: God + a method = offspring. This equation only applies to situations in which there is no standard way of solving conflicts, such as presenting the issue to the whole community, I think.

I think, it's not the branch. In a situation in which standard ways of solving conflicts aren't availabe but God being with you... you could use no matter what method to get the offspring. This is at least my opinion on the matter.

Wow. Of that whole video, the only thing you have an issue with is one part at the end?

It's sarcasm. It's intentionally an exaggeration of what is written. Sure, you can argue that God intervened, but the basic premise is silly.

 

[Altfish]

This is a very popular atheist video on youtube
It's a reflection of the Jacob story.

Biblical Baby Mamas



According to the video (minute 8:40 ff.) , Jacob "used the [...] concept of getting animals to look at white branches while they mated so that they would produce white streaked offspring."

View attachment 45783

In my opinion, this is a misrepresentation of what the author calls Biblical Biology.
In Genesis 31:9 Jacob explains - God is the author of this in a situation of unsolved conflict. Not the method.

So in my opinion, the equation is: God + a method = offspring. This equation only applies to situations in which there is no standard way of solving conflicts, such as presenting the issue to the whole community, I think.

I think, it's not the branch. In a situation in which standard ways of solving conflicts aren't availabe but God being with you... you could use no matter what method to get the offspring. This is at least my opinion on the matter.

Wouldn't it have been a lot clearer if the Bible had simply explained evolution?

 

[ChristineM]

The only people I have EVER seen mention this " Dawkins" on a forum have been the religious ones, especially fundys.

They do seem to be fixated. So an evolutionary biologist has explained how evolution works in biology, the way fundies go on you'd think he'd proven their god wrong

 

[Audie]

Wouldn't it have been a lot clearer if the Bible had simple explained evolution?

The weirdly and totally incorrect biology in the Bible could almost make one think it was written by ignorant people.

 

[Audie]

They do seem to be fixated. So an evolutionary biologist has explained how evolution works in biology, the way fundies go on you'd think he'd proven their god wrong

Its like the fixation on Darwin.
Who else even talks about those guys?

It seems to be that as religions have prophets
the atheists must have them too.

And to knock down the prophet is to crumble his evil legacy.
Much as their religions would be if the religious prophets
could be proven to be fakes.

As for proving the fundy " god" a fiction,
well, if ToE is accurate, their Bible is a lie.

and and and.

Its all pretty silly. Educated Christians roll their eyes.

 

[shunyadragon]

This is a very popular atheist video on youtube
It's a reflection of the Jacob story.

Biblical Baby Mamas



According to the video (minute 8:40 ff.) , Jacob "used the [...] concept of getting animals to look at white branches while they mated so that they would produce white streaked offspring."

View attachment 45783

In my opinion, this is a misrepresentation of what the author calls Biblical Biology.
In Genesis 31:9 Jacob explains - God is the author of this in a situation of unsolved conflict. Not the method.

So in my opinion, the equation is: God + a method = offspring. This equation only applies to situations in which there is no standard way of solving conflicts, such as presenting the issue to the whole community, I think.

I think, it's not the branch. In a situation in which standard ways of solving conflicts aren't availabe but God being with you... you could use no matter what method to get the offspring. This is at least my opinion on the matter.

First these outrageous stupid videos would not be popular with atheists nor anyone else with a basic education is science.

This is bogus par excellence.

 

[shunyadragon]

ok, but they call themselves atheist, in line 3 they call their videos "atheistic animations":
https://www.youtube.com/c/DarkMatter2525
I think it was an atheistic animation.
Speaking from my experience, atheists in the fourms occasionally quote this channel to bring their thoughts accross. They use this channel even more than they use Richard Dawkins qoutes or other outspokenly atheist sources.

I have seen no such quotes as you claim.

 

[Polymath257]

Its like the fixation on Darwin.
Who else even talks about those guys?

It seems to be that as religions have prophets
the atheists must have them too.

And to knock down the prophet is to crumble his evil legacy.
Much as their religions would be if the religious prophets
could be proven to be fakes.

As for proving the fundy " god" a fiction,
well, if ToE is accurate, their Bible is a lie.

and and and.

Its all pretty silly. Educated Christians roll their eyes.

Exactly. They seem to think that if they show that Darwin or Dawkins is wrong about something, then the whole of evolutionary science will crumble.

But, science doesn't have prophets in that way. It has people who have insights and make advances. But *never* is the word of one scientist the final say on *anything*. The insights they have are discussed, criticized, extended, modified, and generally investigated by others to see just how far they go. Never are the insights taken as true without doubt.

It isn't the word of the scientist that determines what is correct: it is the repeatable, testable observations.

Darwin had a great insight into a *mechanism* for evolution. But evolution was already 'in the air' because it had already been noted that species change over time. They question was why and how. And Darwin wasn't the only one who had that insight: Wallace did as well. Furthermore, that insight gave testable predictions that held up to observation.

Until creationists realize evolution isn't some grand conspiracy to negate the Bible, but is instead an honest attempt to understand how things work in the real world, they will never understand its reason for existence and why it is so important for biology.

 

[McBell]

As fas as I know, it's the second most popular atheist video online...

Based on what, exactly?

 

[McBell]

Speaking from my experience, atheists in the fourms occasionally quote this channel to bring their thoughts accross. They use this channel even more than they use Richard Dawkins qoutes or other outspokenly atheist sources.

Based upon my experiences on message boards, the reason this channel is referenced is simply because they are sarcastic representations of the Bible.
Not because the contents are agreed with.

Edit mote
I have not changed the above original post.
Instead I want to clarify that I mean they are sarcastic representations of what many believe the Bible says.