That's the difference, really.
Encyclopedias are carefully researched and fact-checked. Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia, as there is no verification process. Encyclopedias can be cited as an authoritative source, but wikipedia cannot.
But I agree it's a great way to start, if only because of the links it provides.
Can you SEE and WITNESS continental drift? Can you SEE and WITNESS the formation of fossil fuels? Diamonds? Can you SEE and WITNESS the life cycle of a star?
Do you then reject those particular Theories regarding continental drift and the formation of fossil fuels or other similar substances? About stars?
So you take a divinely inspired text written by mortals and then translated by mortals (broken telephone, anyone?) literally?
Personally, I see that as the height of arrogance, to presume that we actually understand the literal acts of God. That the '6 days' written is our actual 144 hours. That we are on the same intellectual level as He, such that he didn't need to dumb things down and use metaphors so that our ancestors, some thousands of years ago, could understand. I mean, Jesus used allegories when preaching, but clearly the original mortal writers and translaters who didn't even know about germs understood God Himself and thus He simply gave them cold, hard, facts.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the difference, really. Encyclopedias are carefully researched and fact-checked. Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia, as there is no verification process. Encyclopedias can be cited as an authoritative source, but wikipedia cannot. But I agree it's a great way to start, if only because of the links it provides.
Can you SEE and WITNESS continental drift?
Can you SEE and WITNESS the formation of fossil fuels? Diamonds?
Can you SEE and WITNESS the life cycle of a star?
Do you then reject those particular Theories regarding continental drift and the formation of fossil fuels or other similar substances? About stars?
So you take a divinely inspired text written by mortals and then translated by mortals (broken telephone, anyone?) literally?
Personally, I see that as the height of arrogance, to presume that we actually understand the literal acts of God. That the '6 days' written is our actual 144 hours. That we are on the same intellectual level as He, such that he didn't need to dumb things down and use metaphors so that our ancestors, some thousands of years ago, could understand. I mean, Jesus used allegories when preaching, but clearly the original mortal writers and translaters who didn't even know about germs understood God Himself and thus He simply gave them cold, hard, facts.