Calling Out TNHarley: Should the 1st Eleven Chapters be Read Literally or Allegorically

ding

Confront reality
Oct 25, 2016
117,361
20,637
2,220
Houston
TNHarley has argued that Genesis was meant to be read literally. I have argued that Genesis was never intended to be read literally.

I'll let him go first. If he doesn't show in a day or two, I'll make my case.

Come at me, bro.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
Which means you require others to read it like you which is literal.
 
Hey, Bob, I require you to make your argument this way.

Sounds pretty dumb to me.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If my interpretation is illogical then you should be able to show how it is illogical, right?
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
I believe in it because I believe my interpretation is right. If my interpretation is not right, then you should be able to show how it is not right. It's my argument to make. You can't make my argument for me. THAT would be illogical.
 
I understand there are many figures of speech in the bible. Like Jesus at the Last supper. "this is my body, this is my blood" Or something like that. Obviously, thats not to be taken literal.
I am referring to other things. Like the flood. Creation. The earth being flat and immobile. Etc.
That was all believed until reality flushed that shit down the drain.
Galileo got oppressed for Copernicanism. Now that is an allegory. Its convenient, ey?
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If my interpretation is illogical then you should be able to show how it is illogical, right?
Your interpretation isnt illogical, its dishonest. You are interpreting it differently BECAUSE the bible is illogical.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If I am right, then it is not intellectually dishonest. If I am wrong, you should be able to show how it was intellectually dishonest by discrediting the content of my argument.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
I believe in it because I believe my interpretation is right. If my interpretation is not right, then you should be able to show how it is not right. It's my argument to make. You can't make my argument for me. THAT would be illogical.
This is why i said this was stupid. Debating your imagination is stupid.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If my interpretation is illogical then you should be able to show how it is illogical, right?
Your interpretation isnt illogical, its dishonest. You are interpreting it differently BECAUSE the bible is illogical.
If it is dishonest then you should be able to show how it is dishonest.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
I believe in it because I believe my interpretation is right. If my interpretation is not right, then you should be able to show how it is not right. It's my argument to make. You can't make my argument for me. THAT would be illogical.
This is why i said this was stupid. Debating your imagination is stupid.
I haven't made my case. I'm just rebutting your case right now.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If my interpretation is illogical then you should be able to show how it is illogical, right?
Your interpretation isnt illogical, its dishonest. You are interpreting it differently BECAUSE the bible is illogical.
If it is dishonest then you should be able to show how it is dishonest.
Already did. Your illiteracy isnt my problem :dunno:
 
I understand there are many figures of speech in the bible. Like Jesus at the Last supper. "this is my body, this is my blood" Or something like that. Obviously, thats not to be taken literal.
I am referring to other things. Like the flood. Creation. The earth being flat and immobile. Etc.
That was all believed until reality flushed that shit down the drain.
Galileo got oppressed for Copernicanism. Now that is an allegory. Its convenient, ey?
Yep, and I'll cover all of that when I make my case.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If my interpretation is illogical then you should be able to show how it is illogical, right?
Your interpretation isnt illogical, its dishonest. You are interpreting it differently BECAUSE the bible is illogical.
If it is dishonest then you should be able to show how it is dishonest.
Ive already explained it. If you arent smart enough to read, that isnt my problem.
You mean read it the way you think I should read it, right?
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
I believe in it because I believe my interpretation is right. If my interpretation is not right, then you should be able to show how it is not right. It's my argument to make. You can't make my argument for me. THAT would be illogical.
This is why i said this was stupid. Debating your imagination is stupid.
I haven't made my case. I'm just rebutting your case right now.
Is that what you call that? Hmmm
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If my interpretation is illogical then you should be able to show how it is illogical, right?
Your interpretation isnt illogical, its dishonest. You are interpreting it differently BECAUSE the bible is illogical.
If it is dishonest then you should be able to show how it is dishonest.
Ive already explained it. If you arent smart enough to read, that isnt my problem.
You mean read it the way you think I should read it, right?
We both read it the same. You just imagine they mean something when there is no evidence they did. Hence, your imagination.
You can interpret however you want, but i will be there to call out your dishonesty.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
I believe in it because I believe my interpretation is right. If my interpretation is not right, then you should be able to show how it is not right. It's my argument to make. You can't make my argument for me. THAT would be illogical.
This is why i said this was stupid. Debating your imagination is stupid.
I haven't made my case. I'm just rebutting your case right now.
Is that what you call that? Hmmm
Yep. You'll know it when you see it, TN.

At this point I have established that you want to make my argument for me. You don't want to let me make my own argument.
 
I have argued its intellectually dishonest to call something an allegory just because it is illogical.
If you have to make shit up to believe in something, why believe in it at all?
If my interpretation is illogical then you should be able to show how it is illogical, right?
Your interpretation isnt illogical, its dishonest. You are interpreting it differently BECAUSE the bible is illogical.
If it is dishonest then you should be able to show how it is dishonest.
Ive already explained it. If you arent smart enough to read, that isnt my problem.
You mean read it the way you think I should read it, right?
We both read it the same. You just imagine they mean something when there is no evidence they did. Hence, your imagination.
You can interpret however you want, but i will be there to call out your dishonesty.
We do not read it the same. You want me to read it like you do. That's what this debate is about.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top