Foundational Falshoods of Creationism

[xmas1997]

Yes or no.

Why is this so confusing for you, Dartmouth?

You are the one confused here, not I?
Why do you keep trying to turn this discussion into some mythical contest that can be won or lost?

[spurraider21]

I believe that since IMHO it WAS written in an allegorical literary style, then it was meant to be symbolism for deeper theological truths, not history in the literal sense of history facts.
But lets keep in mind that history, even in modern day, is interpreted and thus written in favor of the victors.

excellent, seems we are actually making progress. so you don't believe the story of Abraham actually happened. actually as in... in actuality. not symbolically or alegorically. actually.

again, nobody can be "sure" but this is your belief. is that correct?

[Chinook]

btw, not to be petty or anything, but do you reckon there's a difference between an event being symbolic and an event occurring symbolically?

Yeah. The first describes the actual, symbolizing event, and the second describes the symbolized concept. So the fall of the Berlin Wall was symbolic for the end of the Cold War, while the Cold War ended symbolically when the Berlin Wall fell (and literally at some other time that's open to debate).

[RD2191]

xmas what exactly are your beliefs? Tbh. You believe the bible is just a fable? Do you believe in God or a creator?

[xmas1997]

excellent, seems we are actually making progress. so you don't believe the story of Abraham actually happened. actually as in... in actuality. not symbolically or alegorically. actually.

again, nobody can be "sure" but this is your belief. is that correct?

You keep asking me the same stupid question over and over again even though I answered it already.
You are getting redundant.
I prefer my answer rather than "your interpretation" of my answer, thank you very much.
See post #1524.
We can go from there if you like.

[spurraider21]

You keep asking me the same stupid question over and over again even though I answered it already.
You are getting redundant.
I prefer my answer rather than "your interpretation" of my answer, thank you very much.
See post #1524.
We can go from there if you like.

in a thread about faith/beliefs, its not a stupid question to inquire about your beliefs

[Blake]

I agree.

Problem is that from the start of the Bible to the end, he changes.

A lot.

[Blake]

You are the one confused here, not I?
Why do you keep trying to turn this discussion into some mythical contest that can be won or lost?

It's no contest at this point.

[spurraider21]

You keep asking me the same stupid question over and over again even though I answered it already.
You are getting redundant.
I prefer my answer rather than "your interpretation" of my answer, thank you very much.
See post #1524.
We can go from there if you like.

i already quoted 1524 which is where i based my response off of. you said "it was meant to be symbolism... not history in the literal sense of history facts"

i took that to mean that you don't believe events such as the story of Abraham actually occurred. is that wrong to say?

[RD2191]

Problem is that from the start of the Bible to the end, he changes.

A lot.

I don't think God changed. Times, customs, rules/laws may have changed but I think God always tried to help out his people/followers the most he could. Of course even when God tried to be more lenient with them they still couldn't follow simple rules, so of course things changed.

[xmas1997]

xmas what exactly are your beliefs? Tbh. You believe the bible is just a fable? Do you believe in God or a creator?

I believe that God is the Creator and we were created in His image and would do these things and greater, as Christ said.
I think that the bible was man made, although it was inspired by God to impart His truths to us, His children (creations), symbolically, because only in symbolic terms would mankind have even the barest of inklings of understanding of God's reasoning and wisdom. IMHO it would be akin to an ant trying to understand the reasoning and wisdom of a human.
Yet it was also assembled by men who had their own agendas push to gain control, to influence, and to consolidate power, and thus it "could have been" easily corrupted to their own ends by leaving certain things out, and in some cases entire books (gospels, etc.), or changing a word or phrase here and there that could explain the inconsistencies.

[Blake]

I don't think God changed. Times, customs, rules/laws may have changed but I think God always tried to help out his people/followers the most he could. Of course even when God tried to be more lenient with them they still couldn't follow simple rules, so of course things changed.

God definitely changed.

He also made the rules. The rules also changed.

The evidence is crystal clear he is a changing God even though the Bible directly claims he's not.

Paradox.

[Blake]

I believe that God is the Creator and we were created in His image and would do these things and greater, as Christ said.
I think that the bible was man made, although it was inspired by God to impart His truths to us, His children (creations), symbolically, because only in symbolic terms would mankind have even the barest of inklings of understanding of God's reasoning and wisdom. IMHO it would be akin to an ant trying to understand the reasoning and wisdom of a human.
Yet it was also assembled by men who had their own agendas push to gain control, to influence, and to consolidate power, and thus it "could have been" easily corrupted to their own ends by leaving certain things out, and in some cases entire books (gospels, etc.), or changing a word or phrase here and there that could explain the inconsistencies.

So you're saying it was inspired by God to man, but man took it and used it for their own gain.

do you understand why this is a silly notion?

[xmas1997]

in a thread about faith/beliefs, its not a stupid question to inquire about your beliefs

The SAME question asked over and over again after being given an answer the first time is not warranted.

Problem is that from the start of the Bible to the end, he changes.

Who changes, God? If so, why would you presume to say this is not allowed, on your authority, do you think you know the mind of God?
Who are you to know and say what God knows?

Or me? Because if so you are most assuredly wrong again and making up your own usual false accusations and attributing them to others, which strengthens my contention that you are unable to understand even the most rudimentary of statements and opinions.

So you're saying it was inspired by God to man, but man took it and used it for their own gain.

do you understand why this is a silly notion?

I hate to ask you because I know you will just say a bunch of nonsense and gibberish as usual, but I'll bite anyway. Why do you consider this a silly notion?

[RD2191]

I believe that God is the Creator and we were created in His image and would do these things and greater, as Christ said.
I think that the bible was man made, although it was inspired by God to impart His truths to us, His children (creations), symbolically, because only in symbolic terms would mankind have even the barest of inklings of understanding of God's reasoning and wisdom. IMHO it would be akin to an ant trying to understand the reasoning and wisdom of a human.
Yet it was also assembled by men who had their own agendas push to gain control, to influence, and to consolidate power, and thus it "could have been" easily corrupted to their own ends by leaving certain things out, and in some cases entire books (gospels, etc.), or changing a word or phrase here and there that could explain the inconsistencies.

thank you. I appreciate the answer.

[Blake]

The SAME question asked over and over again after being given an answer the first time is not warranted.

Simple yes or no is what we're still looking for....

Yes or no.

Who changes, God? If so, why would you presume to say this is not allowed, on your authority, do you think you know the mind of God?
Who are you to know and say what God knows?

It's not allowed for God to change because the Bible says he doesn't.

It's either inspired/ordained by God or not. Pick a lane.

I hate to ask you because I know you will just say a bunch of nonsense and gibberish as usual, but I'll bite anyway. Why do you consider this a silly notion?

do we agree that the Bible states that God is perfect and can see the future?

If so then it's silly for him to give his truth to people that will it up for all future generations.

[spurraider21]

The SAME question asked over and over again after being given an answer the first time is not warranted.

you have repeatedly refused to answer the question at hand. instead of answering if you believe the events actually occurred you start rambling about the allegorical literary style, or some other equally irrelevant point

are you ashamed of your beliefs? why do you refuse to share them?

[RD2191]

God definitely changed.

He also made the rules. The rules also changed.

The evidence is crystal clear he is a changing God even though the Bible directly claims he's not.

Paradox.

I disagree.

[xmas1997]

It's not allowed for God to change because the Bible says he doesn't.
It's either inspired/ordained by God or not. Pick a lane.

do we agree that the Bible states that God is perfect and can see the future?
If so then it's silly for him to give his truth to people that will it up for all future generations.

Who are you to say and judge what is silly or not when it comes to God, do you know His purposes?
Who said it was "not allowed", you?

So you are saying that man CANNOT up a work of GOD?
Then how do you explain what man has done to the earth so far?
Your contention is preposterous because the bible does say that we have free will, so in essence we are free to believe what we want, and screw up what God has created.

I can only "partially" agree to your second to last sentence, He created "time" so time is as much part of Him as it isn't, plus He always was, always is, and always will be.

You need to do some further research on the concept of "free will".

[xmas1997]

I have stated many times already that I don't think anything in the bible happened in a literal sense, but that it did in a symbolic sense, which would explain why it is written in an allegorical style that was common back then IMHO.
But then people want to interpret my stated opinion into something I am not saying.
No one here can say for sure what happened back then, so how can anyone be expected to know whether any of the events happened or not?
That should be common sense.
None of us were there.
Thus none of us can know.
Why is this so confusing for others to understand?

you have repeatedly refused to answer the question at hand. instead of answering if you believe the events actually occurred you start rambling about the allegorical literary style, or some other equally irrelevant point

are you ashamed of your beliefs? why do you refuse to share them?

For the last and final time above is the answer in bold.

If that is not good enough for you, then kindly off!

Because that is all you will ever get, now and forever.

[spurraider21]

For the last and final time above is the answer in bold.

If that is not good enough for you, then kindly off!

Because that is all you will ever get, now and forever.

so if you don't believe that the story of Abraham actually occured, would you agree that it is fiction? even if written in a certain literary style, fiction is still fiction.

[silverblk mystix]

God definitely changed.


You nor anyone else on the planet or throughout history has any idea what "god" is =
the closest any human can even get - is "maybe" by trying to see what "god" is NOT. -Suddenly you want to argue over something that no one in history even knows what it is? lolololol

He also made the rules. The rules also changed.


Now you are really lost - you never figured out what "god" is - but now you want to talk about "rules" that this "?god?" made? lololololol

The evidence is crystal clear he is a changing God even though the Bible directly claims he's not.


Evidence? lololololol - This is how ridiculous your arguments are - you condescend - and arrogantly assume you are superior and you are as lost as the rest of the planet when it pertains to this topic - lolololol

Wait - you are gonna tell people you have evidence about a mystery? An unknowable mystery - but you have evidence? lolololol ...like I always said - two blind men bashing each other over the head because they disagree on what the color "green" is - and neither one of them has ever "seen" lolololol

Paradox.

[xmas1997]

so if you don't believe that the story of Abraham actually occured, would you agree that it is fiction? even if written in a certain literary style, fiction is still fiction.

I agree that "fictional stories" are fiction, but I do not agree that biblical allegory used as a literary style is by extension fiction.
Why?
Since none of us were there, then none of us can know if it was fact or fiction.
If a bear s in the woods, because you were not there to see it, does that imply that the bear did not in the woods, and thus is fiction?

[spurraider21]

I agree that "fictional stories" are fiction, but I do not agree that biblical allegory used as a literary style is by extension fiction.
Why?
Since none of were there, then none of us can know if it was fact or fiction.
If a bear s in the woods, because you were not there to see it, does that imply that the bear did not in the woods, and thus is fiction?

your words "I don't think anything in the bible happened in a literal sense"


if the events didn't happen "in a literal sense" then they simply didn't happen. and if they didn't happen, that makes the stories fiction. i'm really not sure how this isn't getting through to you. "literary style" or anything else is completely irrelevant to this point, yet you keep mentioning it for some odd reason

[silverblk mystix]

your words "I don't think anything in the bible happened in a literal sense"


if the events didn't happen "in a literal sense" then they simply didn't happen. and if they didn't happen, that makes the stories fiction. i'm really not sure how this isn't getting through to you. "literary style" or anything else is completely irrelevant to this point, yet you keep mentioning it for some odd reason

Translation: "I just want to confirm what I already concluded a long time ago and put my mind to sleep.It is just too much work to keep an open mind and discover truth - I would rather be a robot and keep my mind on cruise control."