Kosh
Junior Member
This has Ken Hams panties all bunched up:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...iterally-says-scholar-brought-light-earliest/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...iterally-says-scholar-brought-light-earliest/
Can't imagine why... He's well practiced at dismissing, ignoring, reframing, or demonizing expert opinions that he doesn't agree with...This has Ken Hams panties all bunched up
OK, one down, millions to go.
Can some scholars please pronounce on which (if any) of these should be taken literally:
The Harry Potter books
The Lord of the Rings trilogy
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy books
Pride and Prejudice
Pride and Prejudice and Zombies
World War Z
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
The Hunt for Red October
The Complete Sherlock Holmes
Alice's Adventures in Wonderland
The Narnia series
The Famous Five books
The Thursday Next books
A Song of Ice and Fire
The Holy Quran
The Complete Works of Shakespeare
The Cities in Flight series
The Foundation series
The Guru Granth Sahib
The Da Vinci Code
The Millenium Trilogy (aka The Girl Who Played with Fire series)
The Twilight series
The Very Hungry Caterpillar
That should be a good start; I am particularly interested in the value of a literal interpretation of The Very Hungry Caterpillar.
I don't think people should have opinions.
This has Ken Hams panties all bunched up:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...iterally-says-scholar-brought-light-earliest/
This has Ken Hams panties all bunched up:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...iterally-says-scholar-brought-light-earliest/
I very much doubt Ken Ham cares what random bible scholarTM says about allegorical Jesus being born to allegorical parents in an allegorical manger then fleeing to an allegorical place called Egypt in order to escape an allegorical psychopath who slaughters allegorical first born male infants to prevent them allegorically usurping his allegorical kingdom...
No, Lion may be right.Except that he complained about it in a FB post (that's how I found the article).I very much doubt Ken Ham cares
No, Lion may be right.Except that he complained about it in a FB post (that's how I found the article).
He may not give a rat's ass about scholarly work finding the historical significance of an allegorical writing (or 'an opinion' if one must minimize its impact). However he probably saw a windmill. And a chance to exhort The Faithful to help him tilt at that windmill... To $how how $trong their faith i$, in the u$ual manner.
I don't think people should have opinions.I don't think people should have opinions.
Well in that case people can have one opinion if their opinion is that people shouldn't have opinions. Then it will become true by virtue of repetition.
Repeat an opinion often enough it becomes a sort of objective reality.
I don't think people should have opinions.
Whoosh. You hear the scream of a Tie fighter pass overhead, and wonder "how the duck is there noise in space?"I don't think people should have opinions.
Your opinion is acknowledged .
Whoosh. You hear the scream of a Tie fighter pass overhead, and wonder "how the duck is there noise in space?"I don't think people should have opinions.
Your opinion is acknowledged .