Is the Bible the inerrent word of God?

[sakinago]

....and the lowest common denominator is still the people you hold to our modern standards in describing how the universe came about. My points are clear on the fact that its not really about YOU explaining this, or a god explaining this, but the people it would’ve been explained to. I really thought an atheist wouldn’t run to strawman as much as this.

You can call it a strawman all you want. The question is very simple. When these ancient people tried to explain things they didn't understand, why did they start with "God did this..."? Unless your answer is, God was there to tell them, then the only reasonable answer is, "They made that shit up,"

And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in. I’ve tried to make that quite clear, many times. You try to skip this point more than a respectable atheist should. You might as well be a satanist, who acknowledges god but wants to reject god just to be different.

"And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in"

I don't get this... what do you mean, "how"? Humans had the abilities of imagination and language then, just as they do now.

I’m in disbelief that this first half ass salvo has cut this deep into “hard core” atheists. Holy shit, ok...consider again we’re talking about very ego centric people who were one of the very very few who didn’t consider the sun was an actual god, and one of many gods. Which if I lived back then, the sun, and moon, and whatever other superstition based loosly on the cycle of survival, being one of many gods would’ve been more likely than a singular god who instead of creating everything all at once went in the order of no light to light, shapeless earth to land and sea, and then sea creatures to land animals, and from land animals, to humans.

You do know that Yeshua was just one of many Sun Gods worshipped by ancient desert tribes, right? The Bible, even the first books, were written years, even centuries, after the religion had already coalesced into Judaism. Hell, the Jews grew out of that polytheistic realm. You act like the Jews sprang out of the ground already worshipping a single god. There is absolutely nothing in archaeological information about the region to suggest that.

They pretty much did, and yeshua (isn’t that greek or Latin for Jesus?) was quite different from yawhea, who it was illegal to consider merely a sun god to Jews. Name me another monotheistic society (I think there may be one other). And the oldest Jewish writings spoke of a conflict with the polytheist creeping into monotheist Jew culture, which the entire old testament is a story of the Jews bouncing back and forth monotheism and polytheism, and correlating times of prosperousness vs being subject...and the tunnels of hezekiah were thought to be lore until we found them and had to say oh shit... that was more accurate than we expected.

 

[sakinago]

I’ll hop in. C This is people who thought the earth was flat and the sun and moon spinned around them.

Who thought the earth was flat? that's a myth dreamed up by ...um .... 18th and 19th Century allegedly 'educated atheists'.

Myth of the flat Earth - Wikipedia

Uh...I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the belief that the Earth was flat goes back a great deal further than that. In fact The Early Church ridiculed, and even imprisoned for heresy anyone "silly enough" to suggest that the earth was a sphere:

Christian Topography (547) by the Alexandrian monk Cosmas Indicopleustes, who had travelled as far as Sri Lanka and the source of the Blue Nile, is now widely considered the most valuable geographical document of the early medieval age, although it received relatively little attention from contemporaries. In it, the author repeatedly expounds the doctrine that the universe consists of only two places, the Earth below the firmament and heaven above it. Carefully drawing on arguments from scripture, he describes the Earth as a rectangle, 400 day's journey long by 200 wide, surrounded by four oceans and enclosed by four massive walls which support the firmament. The spherical Earth theory is contemptuously dismissed as "pagan"

So...yeah...the idea that the Earth was flat precedes the 1800's by quite a bit.

Rubbish.

Flat Earth - Wikipedia

Finding a couple of Bishops or somebody who thought the Earth was flat isn't some proof that theory had anything to do with Christianity, or what most Christians and Jews thought. Flat Earthers were a distinct and very small minority in the West, unlike most other parts of the world, like China and elsewhere.

You can call it a strawman all you want. The question is very simple. When these ancient people tried to explain things they didn't understand, why did they start with "God did this..."? Unless your answer is, God was there to tell them, then the only reasonable answer is, "They made that shit up,"

And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in. I’ve tried to make that quite clear, many times. You try to skip this point more than a respectable atheist should. You might as well be a satanist, who acknowledges god but wants to reject god just to be different.

I keep making that point. You keep calling it a "straw man". If they made that shit up, then the Bible is no different than any other work written by man.

Except they got pretty damn close, taking in consideration their knowledge at the time, it’s at the very least impressive. When you compare to any other creation story...not a contest. And even now you’re still missing the point.

He certainly didn't post anything proving all those ancient atheists discovered the Earth was round, or discovered anything else. that's because most of what passes for atheism these days is purely politically motivated, and has nothing to do with 'science', hence the constant barrage of silly lies and deliberate distortions.

I didn't say that it was Christian. The flat Earth theory pre-dates Christianity by about 7 or 8 centuries. I only said that the Early Christian Church subscribed to the theory. It was one of the things that got Copernicus thrown into prison. That, and the fact that he dared to put forth the heretical theory that the Earth wasn't the centre of the solar system, let alone the universe.

Why can’t people comprehend that a flat earth was just a “duh” given back then BECAUSE IT WAS FLAT FOR EVERYONE, which is what Columbus’s trip so risky and brash.

 

[sakinago]

....and the lowest common denominator is still the people you hold to our modern standards in describing how the universe came about. My points are clear on the fact that its not really about YOU explaining this, or a god explaining this, but the people it would’ve been explained to. I really thought an atheist wouldn’t run to strawman as much as this.

You can call it a strawman all you want. The question is very simple. When these ancient people tried to explain things they didn't understand, why did they start with "God did this..."? Unless your answer is, God was there to tell them, then the only reasonable answer is, "They made that shit up,"

And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in. I’ve tried to make that quite clear, many times. You try to skip this point more than a respectable atheist should. You might as well be a satanist, who acknowledges god but wants to reject god just to be different.

"And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in"

I don't get this... what do you mean, "how"? Humans had the abilities of imagination and language then, just as they do now.

I’m in disbelief that this first half ass salvo has cut this deep into “hard core” atheists. Holy shit, ok...consider again we’re talking about very ego centric people who were one of the very very few who didn’t consider the sun was an actual god, and one of many gods. Which if I lived back then, the sun, and moon, and whatever other superstition based loosly on the cycle of survival, being one of many gods would’ve been more likely than a singular god who instead of creating everything all at once went in the order of no light to light, shapeless earth to land and sea, and then sea creatures to land animals, and from land animals, to humans.

You do know that Yahweh was just one of many Sun Gods worshipped by ancient desert tribes, right? The Bible, even the first books, were written years, even centuries, after the religion had already coalesced into Judaism. Hell, the Jews grew out of that polytheistic realm. You act like the Jews sprang out of the ground already worshipping a single god. There is absolutely nothing in archaeological information about the region to suggest that.

In it's earliest incarnation, Judaism wasn't even monotheistic. It was a form of monolatry. And they weren't even the first civilisation to practice Monolatry. That would have been the 18th Egyptian dynasty, about a thousand years before the Yahweh cult even came into being.

And Judaism would predate any sort of land claim in the “promise land”, or pyramids, maybe even Sargon...they had desert tribes according to their own accounts, that could be giving credence to actual judeaism. Remember Jews were apparently Jews LONG before Moses (and the exodus) who was apparently the just their first author.

 

[sakinago]

Oh please stop, I’m just illustrating my point of the disparity of knowledge, which either a god or modernly educated person (using person to help you sympathize) vs people who don’t know their elbow from their asshole...that’s what we’re dealing with. Stop with the strawman.

Except you are trying to say that the Bible - particularly the creation story - arose from a primitive people trying to describe events for which they had no understanding. Okay. I would agree that their narrative would probably not be scientific. However that still doesn't explain the insertion of God into the narrative. Guess what? If I had to describe how a nuclear device works, it probably wouldn't be scientifically accurate, as I am not a nuclear physicist. However, my description certainly would not start with, "God created a little ball of energy..." and take it from there. There is no explanation, in your analysis, for inserting the God myth into the story.

....and the lowest common denominator is still the people you hold to our modern standards in describing how the universe came about. My points are clear on the fact that its not really about YOU explaining this, or a god explaining this, but the people it would’ve been explained to. I really thought an atheist wouldn’t run to strawman as much as this.

You can call it a strawman all you want. The question is very simple. When these ancient people tried to explain things they didn't understand, why did they start with "God did this..."? Unless your answer is, God was there to tell them, then the only reasonable answer is, "They made that shit up,"

And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in. I’ve tried to make that quite clear, many times. You try to skip this point more than a respectable atheist should. You might as well be a satanist, who acknowledges god but wants to reject god just to be different.

I keep making that point. You keep calling it a "straw man". If they made that shit up, then the Bible is no different than any other work written by man.

And the strawman is in whether they made it all up or wether there was something lost in translation, and by while not totally understanding the translation you could say, “ok I think I get what they mean, despite it being lost in translation.” Again I’m not saying they made it all up, you are saying that; maybe this point falls moot on someone who doesnt actuall have to speak with people from multiple countries with multiple languages (it shouldn’t). But you keep getting hung up on saying they made it all up (really I suspect you are running to a strawman)

 

[Czernobog]

You can call it a strawman all you want. The question is very simple. When these ancient people tried to explain things they didn't understand, why did they start with "God did this..."? Unless your answer is, God was there to tell them, then the only reasonable answer is, "They made that shit up,"

And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in. I’ve tried to make that quite clear, many times. You try to skip this point more than a respectable atheist should. You might as well be a satanist, who acknowledges god but wants to reject god just to be different.

"And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in"

I don't get this... what do you mean, "how"? Humans had the abilities of imagination and language then, just as they do now.

I’m in disbelief that this first half ass salvo has cut this deep into “hard core” atheists. Holy shit, ok...consider again we’re talking about very ego centric people who were one of the very very few who didn’t consider the sun was an actual god, and one of many gods. Which if I lived back then, the sun, and moon, and whatever other superstition based loosly on the cycle of survival, being one of many gods would’ve been more likely than a singular god who instead of creating everything all at once went in the order of no light to light, shapeless earth to land and sea, and then sea creatures to land animals, and from land animals, to humans.

You do know that Yeshua was just one of many Sun Gods worshipped by ancient desert tribes, right? The Bible, even the first books, were written years, even centuries, after the religion had already coalesced into Judaism. Hell, the Jews grew out of that polytheistic realm. You act like the Jews sprang out of the ground already worshipping a single god. There is absolutely nothing in archaeological information about the region to suggest that.

They pretty much did, and yeshua (isn’t that greek or Latin for Jesus?) was quite different from yawhea, who it was illegal to consider merely a sun god to Jews. Name me another monotheistic society (I think there may be one other). And the oldest Jewish writings spoke of a conflict with the polytheist creeping into monotheist Jew culture, which the entire old testament is a story of the Jews bouncing back and forth monotheism and polytheism, and correlating times of prosperousness vs being subject...and the tunnels of hezekiah were thought to be lore until we found them and had to say oh shit... that was more accurate than we expected.

You posted before I had a chance to correct, and add the latter portion of the post about the Yahweh cult. In it's earliest incarnation, Judaism wasn't even monotheistic. It was a form of monolatry - is belief in the existence of many gods but with the consistent worship of only one deity.. And they weren't even the first civilisation to practice Monolatry. That would have been the 18th Egyptian dynasty, about a thousand years before the Yahweh cult even came into being.

 

[Czernobog]

You can call it a strawman all you want. The question is very simple. When these ancient people tried to explain things they didn't understand, why did they start with "God did this..."? Unless your answer is, God was there to tell them, then the only reasonable answer is, "They made that shit up,"

And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in. I’ve tried to make that quite clear, many times. You try to skip this point more than a respectable atheist should. You might as well be a satanist, who acknowledges god but wants to reject god just to be different.

"And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in"

I don't get this... what do you mean, "how"? Humans had the abilities of imagination and language then, just as they do now.

I’m in disbelief that this first half ass salvo has cut this deep into “hard core” atheists. Holy shit, ok...consider again we’re talking about very ego centric people who were one of the very very few who didn’t consider the sun was an actual god, and one of many gods. Which if I lived back then, the sun, and moon, and whatever other superstition based loosly on the cycle of survival, being one of many gods would’ve been more likely than a singular god who instead of creating everything all at once went in the order of no light to light, shapeless earth to land and sea, and then sea creatures to land animals, and from land animals, to humans.

You do know that Yahweh was just one of many Sun Gods worshipped by ancient desert tribes, right? The Bible, even the first books, were written years, even centuries, after the religion had already coalesced into Judaism. Hell, the Jews grew out of that polytheistic realm. You act like the Jews sprang out of the ground already worshipping a single god. There is absolutely nothing in archaeological information about the region to suggest that.

In it's earliest incarnation, Judaism wasn't even monotheistic. It was a form of monolatry. And they weren't even the first civilisation to practice Monolatry. That would have been the 18th Egyptian dynasty, about a thousand years before the Yahweh cult even came into being.

And Judaism would predate any sort of land claim in the “promise land”, or pyramids, maybe even Sargon...they had desert tribes according to their own accounts, that could be giving credence to actual judeaism. Remember Jews were apparently Jews LONG before Moses (and the exodus) who was apparently the just their first author.

Except he wasn't. In fact the earliest extant copies of the Torah (the so called "Books of Moses") were not even written until about 600 BCE, long after the mythical Moses was dead. It wasn't even until 300 BCE that Rabbinical leaders felt compelled to assign authorship to the books.It should also be pointed out that there are two different Gods referred to in Genesis - El (Chapter 1), and Yaweh (Chapter 2). The reality is that the coming together of the Bible isn't nearly as seamless, and uniform as you might suppose.

 

[Czernobog]

Except you are trying to say that the Bible - particularly the creation story - arose from a primitive people trying to describe events for which they had no understanding. Okay. I would agree that their narrative would probably not be scientific. However that still doesn't explain the insertion of God into the narrative. Guess what? If I had to describe how a nuclear device works, it probably wouldn't be scientifically accurate, as I am not a nuclear physicist. However, my description certainly would not start with, "God created a little ball of energy..." and take it from there. There is no explanation, in your analysis, for inserting the God myth into the story.

....and the lowest common denominator is still the people you hold to our modern standards in describing how the universe came about. My points are clear on the fact that its not really about YOU explaining this, or a god explaining this, but the people it would’ve been explained to. I really thought an atheist wouldn’t run to strawman as much as this.

You can call it a strawman all you want. The question is very simple. When these ancient people tried to explain things they didn't understand, why did they start with "God did this..."? Unless your answer is, God was there to tell them, then the only reasonable answer is, "They made that shit up,"

And my whole point is how did they make this up on their own, considering the time they lived in. I’ve tried to make that quite clear, many times. You try to skip this point more than a respectable atheist should. You might as well be a satanist, who acknowledges god but wants to reject god just to be different.

I keep making that point. You keep calling it a "straw man". If they made that shit up, then the Bible is no different than any other work written by man.

And the strawman is in whether they made it all up or wether there was something lost in translation, and by while not totally understanding the translation you could say, “ok I think I get what they mean, despite it being lost in translation.” Again I’m not saying they made it all up, you are saying that; maybe this point falls moot on someone who doesnt actuall have to speak with people from multiple countries with multiple languages (it shouldn’t). But you keep getting hung up on saying they made it all up (really I suspect you are running to a strawman)

And you seem to be hung up on the question of whether their religious text lines up with science, or not. Lemme help you with that. It doesn't. Now, why it's important to you to pretend that it does, I don't know.

 

[hobelim]

The law was spoken into existence as a light to the nations. The story of the creation of heaven and earth is really very uncomplicated already. Of course it matters if you do or don't understand what the story is even about.

Blindness of the audience must be addressed before anyone can see that light.

Nations didn't exist when the lights went on in our universe.

Ugh.. Is that the best you can do?

Before the law was given as a light that teaches people to distinguish between good and evil, true and false, clean and unclean, etc., the world was without form and void, and darkness covered the face of the deep.

The story of genesis has absolutely nothing whatever to do with the creation of the universe, or the solar system or the first plants, animals or human beings..

lol, nothing in the bible means what's written it seems, because every time I bring something up, someone says "well, what's written is not what it means".

You like to dismiss the stories as fairy tales or fables but then balk at the revelation of the hidden teaching.

In any fairy tale with talking animals in a mythological place what it means, the teaching conveyed, is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Does this shock you? Am I telling you something that you don't already know?

Are you still angry at God because he let grandma get eaten by the big bad wolf?

sheesh...

When a child asks you for something good to eat for breakfast would you give them a bowl of turds?

What makes you think that when bronze age Hebrew children were hungry to start learning about life in the greater world they were given a load of crap?

So you're comparing the Bible to a fairy tale. Which one? Goldilocks and the 3 bears?

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? Science proves it false. snakes cant talk.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

 

[Mudda]

Nations didn't exist when the lights went on in our universe.

Ugh.. Is that the best you can do?

Before the law was given as a light that teaches people to distinguish between good and evil, true and false, clean and unclean, etc., the world was without form and void, and darkness covered the face of the deep.

The story of genesis has absolutely nothing whatever to do with the creation of the universe, or the solar system or the first plants, animals or human beings..

lol, nothing in the bible means what's written it seems, because every time I bring something up, someone says "well, what's written is not what it means".

You like to dismiss the stories as fairy tales or fables but then balk at the revelation of the hidden teaching.

In any fairy tale with talking animals in a mythological place what it means, the teaching conveyed, is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Does this shock you? Am I telling you something that you don't already know?

Are you still angry at God because he let grandma get eaten by the big bad wolf?

sheesh...

When a child asks you for something good to eat for breakfast would you give them a bowl of turds?

What makes you think that when bronze age Hebrew children were hungry to start learning about life in the greater world they were given a load of crap?

So you're comparing the Bible to a fairy tale. Which one? Goldilocks and the 3 bears?

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? snakes cant talk. science proves it false.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

 

[hobelim]

Ugh.. Is that the best you can do?

Before the law was given as a light that teaches people to distinguish between good and evil, true and false, clean and unclean, etc., the world was without form and void, and darkness covered the face of the deep.

The story of genesis has absolutely nothing whatever to do with the creation of the universe, or the solar system or the first plants, animals or human beings..

lol, nothing in the bible means what's written it seems, because every time I bring something up, someone says "well, what's written is not what it means".

You like to dismiss the stories as fairy tales or fables but then balk at the revelation of the hidden teaching.

In any fairy tale with talking animals in a mythological place what it means, the teaching conveyed, is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Does this shock you? Am I telling you something that you don't already know?

Are you still angry at God because he let grandma get eaten by the big bad wolf?

sheesh...

When a child asks you for something good to eat for breakfast would you give them a bowl of turds?

What makes you think that when bronze age Hebrew children were hungry to start learning about life in the greater world they were given a load of crap?

So you're comparing the Bible to a fairy tale. Which one? Goldilocks and the 3 bears?

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? snakes cant talk. science proves it false.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

 

[Mudda]

lol, nothing in the bible means what's written it seems, because every time I bring something up, someone says "well, what's written is not what it means".

You like to dismiss the stories as fairy tales or fables but then balk at the revelation of the hidden teaching.

In any fairy tale with talking animals in a mythological place what it means, the teaching conveyed, is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Does this shock you? Am I telling you something that you don't already know?

Are you still angry at God because he let grandma get eaten by the big bad wolf?

sheesh...

When a child asks you for something good to eat for breakfast would you give them a bowl of turds?

What makes you think that when bronze age Hebrew children were hungry to start learning about life in the greater world they were given a load of crap?

So you're comparing the Bible to a fairy tale. Which one? Goldilocks and the 3 bears?

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? snakes cant talk. science proves it false.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known figurative literary expressions.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

You are totally wrong and you know it, the people back then thought that these stories were true, you can't deny that. It's only since the advent of science that people are slowly stopping to believe in them.

 

[hobelim]

You like to dismiss the stories as fairy tales or fables but then balk at the revelation of the hidden teaching.

In any fairy tale with talking animals in a mythological place what it means, the teaching conveyed, is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Does this shock you? Am I telling you something that you don't already know?

Are you still angry at God because he let grandma get eaten by the big bad wolf?

sheesh...

When a child asks you for something good to eat for breakfast would you give them a bowl of turds?

What makes you think that when bronze age Hebrew children were hungry to start learning about life in the greater world they were given a load of crap?

So you're comparing the Bible to a fairy tale. Which one? Goldilocks and the 3 bears?

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? snakes cant talk. science proves it false.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known figurative literary expressions.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

You are totally wrong and you know it, the people back then thought that these stories were true, you can't deny that. It's only since the advent of science that people are slowly stopping to believe in them.

The people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching, however irrational and superstitious people tended to be back then.

The proof is in the written words themselves.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.


guess what? You inability to demonstrate an intelligence above that of a donkey proves that the story of Pinocchio conveys truth.


So, go ahead...

Act surprised, again, at the revelation that the Bible is like a collection of fairy tales.

ugh....

 

[Mudda]

So you're comparing the Bible to a fairy tale. Which one? Goldilocks and the 3 bears?

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? snakes cant talk. science proves it false.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known figurative literary expressions.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

You are totally wrong and you know it, the people back then thought that these stories were true, you can't deny that. It's only since the advent of science that people are slowly stopping to believe in them.

The people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching, however irrational and superstitious people tended to be back then.

The proof is in the written words themselves.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.


guess what? You inability to demonstrate an intelligence above that of a donkey proves that the story of Pinocchio conveys truth.

That they used "sophisticated" anything back in those days, but especially "well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching" is VERY funny, and I bet that you yourself don't really believe that. But thanks for the laugh.

 

[hobelim]

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? snakes cant talk. science proves it false.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known figurative literary expressions.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

You are totally wrong and you know it, the people back then thought that these stories were true, you can't deny that. It's only since the advent of science that people are slowly stopping to believe in them.

The people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching, however irrational and superstitious people tended to be back then.

The proof is in the written words themselves.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.


guess what? You inability to demonstrate an intelligence above that of a donkey proves that the story of Pinocchio conveys truth.

That they used "sophisticated" anything back in those days, but especially "well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching" is VERY funny, and I bet that you yourself don't really believe that. But thanks for the laugh.

You're welcome! Nothing like a good laugh...

But try to understand that in other peoples ears you laughter sounds about as joyous as the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..

Enjoy!

 

[Mudda]

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known figurative literary expressions.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

You are totally wrong and you know it, the people back then thought that these stories were true, you can't deny that. It's only since the advent of science that people are slowly stopping to believe in them.

The people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching, however irrational and superstitious people tended to be back then.

The proof is in the written words themselves.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.


guess what? You inability to demonstrate an intelligence above that of a donkey proves that the story of Pinocchio conveys truth.

That they used "sophisticated" anything back in those days, but especially "well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching" is VERY funny, and I bet that you yourself don't really believe that. But thanks for the laugh.

You're welcome! Nothing like a good laugh...

But try to understand that in other peoples eyes you laughter is about as joyous as the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..

Enjoy!

So when I read juvenile insults like "the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..", does it means something else? Like you are conceding the point to me? Am I god?

 

[hobelim]

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known figurative literary expressions.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

You are totally wrong and you know it, the people back then thought that these stories were true, you can't deny that. It's only since the advent of science that people are slowly stopping to believe in them.

The people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching, however irrational and superstitious people tended to be back then.

The proof is in the written words themselves.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.


guess what? You inability to demonstrate an intelligence above that of a donkey proves that the story of Pinocchio conveys truth.

That they used "sophisticated" anything back in those days, but especially "well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching" is VERY funny, and I bet that you yourself don't really believe that. But thanks for the laugh.

You're welcome! Nothing like a good laugh...

But try to understand that in other peoples eyes you laughter is about as joyous as the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..

Enjoy!

So when I read juvenile insults like "the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..", does it means something else? Like you are conceding the point to me? Am I god?

Yes! Very good! But again you misunderstand. You are not god.


The deeper implications of your current condition revealed by the garbage that comes out of your addled mind is that you died a very long time ago.


Did anything of a significantly traumatic nature happen to you when you were a little boy?

 

[Mudda]

You are totally wrong and you know it, the people back then thought that these stories were true, you can't deny that. It's only since the advent of science that people are slowly stopping to believe in them.

The people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching, however irrational and superstitious people tended to be back then.

The proof is in the written words themselves.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.


guess what? You inability to demonstrate an intelligence above that of a donkey proves that the story of Pinocchio conveys truth.

That they used "sophisticated" anything back in those days, but especially "well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching" is VERY funny, and I bet that you yourself don't really believe that. But thanks for the laugh.

You're welcome! Nothing like a good laugh...

But try to understand that in other peoples eyes you laughter is about as joyous as the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..

Enjoy!

So when I read juvenile insults like "the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..", does it means something else? Like you are conceding the point to me? Am I god?

Yes! Very good! But again you misunderstand. You are not god.


The deeper implications of your current condition revealed by the garbage that comes out of your addled mind is that you died a very long time ago.


Did anything of a significantly traumatic nature happen to you when you were a little boy?

I went to Sunday School.

 

[hobelim]

The people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching, however irrational and superstitious people tended to be back then.

The proof is in the written words themselves.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.


guess what? You inability to demonstrate an intelligence above that of a donkey proves that the story of Pinocchio conveys truth.

That they used "sophisticated" anything back in those days, but especially "well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc. for teaching" is VERY funny, and I bet that you yourself don't really believe that. But thanks for the laugh.

You're welcome! Nothing like a good laugh...

But try to understand that in other peoples eyes you laughter is about as joyous as the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..

Enjoy!

So when I read juvenile insults like "the cackling of the hopelessly insane who find a perverse sort of humor in their own pathetic aberrations..", does it means something else? Like you are conceding the point to me? Am I god?

Yes! Very good! But again you misunderstand. You are not god.


The deeper implications of your current condition revealed by the garbage that comes out of your addled mind is that you died a very long time ago.


Did anything of a significantly traumatic nature happen to you when you were a little boy?

I went to Sunday School.

Nuff said.

You do have my condolences....

 

[Czernobog]

lol, nothing in the bible means what's written it seems, because every time I bring something up, someone says "well, what's written is not what it means".

You like to dismiss the stories as fairy tales or fables but then balk at the revelation of the hidden teaching.

In any fairy tale with talking animals in a mythological place what it means, the teaching conveyed, is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Does this shock you? Am I telling you something that you don't already know?

Are you still angry at God because he let grandma get eaten by the big bad wolf?

sheesh...

When a child asks you for something good to eat for breakfast would you give them a bowl of turds?

What makes you think that when bronze age Hebrew children were hungry to start learning about life in the greater world they were given a load of crap?

So you're comparing the Bible to a fairy tale. Which one? Goldilocks and the 3 bears?

lol....Is this your first day here? How many times have we had this discussion before? 5? !0?

What gives? No memory? You're stuck in some type of deficient intellectual loop? Science proves it false. snakes can't talk, oh its like a fairy tale? science proves it false. snakes cant talk, oh its like a fairy tale? snakes cant talk. science proves it false.. Oh its like a fairy tale?

And some people don't believe they can be struck with blindness by the invisible hand of a sky fairy.


Imagine that!

The people who wrote the bible believed every word to be taken literally, as an event that actually happened. It's people like you who realize that the bible is a false scientifically that feel the need to move the goalposts. So now there's no Adam and Eve, god talking, flood, walking on water, resurrection, nailing to the cross... Or are you a cherry picker and keep only what you like?

No, the people who wrote the bible used well known sophisticated figurative literary expressions., metaphors, allegories, parables, homonyms, hyperbole, etc.

Hate to break the news to you but a talking donkey 5000 years ago had the same implications a talking donkey has in any story written today - in any language.

I'm sure your mudda tried to warn you.

If you stay of Pleasure Island for too long, those donkey ears are there to stay.....(Pinocchio 3:14)


Remember? I guess not.

Now you're trying to rewrite history. Mudda is correct. But, I'm not gonna bother giving you a history lesson. However, you have yet to tell us why, if the bible is nothing more than a fairy tale, should we treat the Bible any different than any other book? You seem to be indicating that the Bible is absolutely not the word of God, but is the creation of Men.

 

[Czernobog]

So, go ahead...

Act surprised, again, at the revelation that the Bible is like a collection of fairy tales.

ugh....

I see what you did there. You start out by insisting that it is absurd to think that a book with talking snakes, and donkeys as anything other than a collection of fairy tales. But, now, you end with The Bible is like a collection of fairy tales, implying that you think there is some difference between the Bible, and other fairy tales. And what would that difference be?