Roy, could you try editing the part I’ve quoted? I’m wondering if I just encountered a browser hiccup or whether editing words that have been quoted is blocked.
And black actually IS white, etymologically, but white is NOT black. If you watch burning coal you can see it. Like sunspots, you know?
So yeah, I don’t see why an extinct species, one that no longer has any living representatives in our here and now, can’t actually be extant, because all times are now, according to eternalism. Yeah.
Apistos, @Burrawang has already said he made a typo, that he meant to say Coelacanths aren’t extinct, and he has been flustered by his inability to edit his post to fix this. That’s what this whole digression about editing has been about.
I was the one who said that under his definitions of life and death, coelacanths “could live, die violently and go extinct all without any death.” Suggesting coelacanths were extinct was my blunder, not his.
2 Likes
Done - it worked. I really don’t see how the browser software could know whether text has been quoted or not.
1 Like
You didn’t actually suggest that coelacanths were extinct (though you may have meant to), only that they could go extinct.
The 
isn’t just because he omitted the ‘not’, which is not an uncommon occurrence, but because his reply misses the target either way.
It’s from the markup that you see when you select text and click “Quote”:
[quote="Roy, post:468, topic:57009"]
Discourse uses that to insert all the different controls that let you expand the quote to show the original in its entirety. It’s straightforward to insert a reference in the database indicating “Post A has been quoted by Post B”.
You can also see the complete edit history of your own posts.
There is also an option to let you see the edit history of everybody else’s posts, though it appears to be disabled on this forum.
But that just notes that some of the text from that post has been quoted. It’s a lot harder to tell whether a particular phrase has been quoted.
Also, you can miss out that part, or change it
Now I get to see what happens if I change “true” to “false”.
Thanks. That narrows things down. I was unable to edit the last line of this post, but I think now I know why. After I started to make my edit, @Bill_II responded to it. As @jammycakes mentioned, that causes the forum software to add an invisible tag to my post with the reply. When I tried to complete my edit, my version didn’t have that tag, so it gave me an error instead of letting me post it. I think that may have been what happened to @Burrawang too.
Yeah, I know. I inferred it, and I was thinking it at the time – which is embarrasing because I’ve read about them before and should know better. It’s just not a piece of data that’s top of mind for me, and I wasn’t trying to make a scientific point. This is why I generally leave the scientific discussion to others who are better qualified.
1 Like
- I conclude that, like ChatGPT, Young Earth Creationists can make mistakes.
2 Likes
I think the timing’s wrong - Burrawang seems to have been trying to edit his post after seeing my response (which only took a few seconds anyway, making it less likely there was a clash and ensuring that a second attempt should have worked).
I don’t know. For me, I tried several times to start over with that edit and always got the same error, even when switching between a phone and PC. The initial clash seemed to prevent me editing it at all, though when I tried just now I could edit it fine. Perhaps there’s something more to it, but regardless I don’t think @Burrawang is being targeted with special limits on his edits.
1 Like
I’ve never been aware of any editing limitations - including editing stuff after it’s been quoted. E.g. - I correct some original misspelling I made, but see that it still remains in its pristine, embarrassing misspelled state wherever someone may have quoted it. As Roy said, the forum software isn’t complicated enough to care what’s been pasted or quoted elsewhere.
I’m suspecting that forum difficulties may be more general stuff like servers being moody. I tried to move all these “editing posts” posts into a new thread of their own just now and got an error that prevented the action from happening. Will try again later and maybe it goes through then. Like all things on the internet, just generally stuff doesn’t work 100% of the time. Server traffic, time of day, etc. …
Probably because the text doesn’t actually say that – you just think it does, which is inconsistent with how you view Eve as “mother of all living”.
Show us that from the text.
The thing is, you can’t – which makes your position unbiblical. The only thing that can be shown from the text is that human death didn’t happen until the Fall.
Which makes good theological sense: humans aren’t just animals, and so aren’t in the same category as them; that humans should be probationarily immortal while animals weren’t would show that distinction.
In a nod to your poor memory, read Genesis 1 and Daniel 7 – and put it together. Throw in 2 Peter 3 and think about it.
See, real Christian thinkers put concepts together, not snatches of information from specific verses.
BTW, “books, chapters, and verses” aren’t relevant – what’s relevant is that devout thinkers saw deep time in scripture as far back as the eighth century. Just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t there; it means you’re committing the same fallacy as those who deny the Trinity because it isn’t in any specific verse.
Sources have been mentioned on this forum before; I’ll have to dig since I don’t have them in memory.
2 Likes
I rebuke that in the Name of Jesus!
You are so free with slander of other Christians it turns my stomach.
2 Likes
Nice collection – I wasn’t actually familiar with the Ecclesiastes and Habakkuk passages. Thanks!
The Hebrew in Habakkuk certainly points to a very, very ancient earth – “eternal” mountains and “forever” hills.
This is called “honesty” – and responsibility; proof-check your posts before hitting “Reply”.
Excellent question!
Of course not all peoples are listed in Genesis 10 – which is one of the arguments used to assert that there were other humans besides Adam’s family.
4 Likes
From the guidelines for this forum:
Somehow I don’t think claiming that other participants on this forum are not Christians because of limitations of the forum software itself meets that standard.
2 Likes
I sometimes wonder if this thread was some kind of social experiment 
.
In view of the adversarial and denigrating content directed towards people of good faith, I would say that the moderators displayed abundant grace in allowing as many of the posts as they did. As @jammycakes has pointed out, this forum has clear guidelines for gracious dialogue, and this thread has certainly put them to a severe test.
2 Likes