The bible is not historical fact (Revelation, punishment, Christian, believe)

[fractured_kidult]

Originally Posted by tigetmax24

...says you, and we all know what opinions are like.

No, actually says fact. When the Bible claims the Great flood happened that wiped out the whole earth of live, many civilizations were around before and after. Greatest example is that of Egypt.

It seems to me that the great problem with this view has to do with the concept of truth. It's theoretically possible for all 'religions' to be false, but they can't all be true. This rule would also apply to Biblical hermeneutics. You're certainly entitled to believe the Bible is false but you've failed to make much of a case to support your opinion.

Actually, you are wrong. Every religion could be partially true. Life evolves, our thoughts evolve, our way of doing things evolve, why can't spirituality? Again, you are wrong, every religion could have some of it right and some of it wrong. There is no way to know for sure how much one religion has right and wrong. The only thing that really matters is their actions on earth. A religion that is prejudiced to others for their beliefs or life choices is wrong in that part, but might have it right in other areas.

I never said the bible was false, just misinterpreted. I said that it is not historically accurate. It's possible that the biblical times happened at ta different time than what modern scholars think. It is possible that it could be just another book written by man. I don't know.

Are we to take the '900+ years' literally? Where is your evidence or reason for discounting the possibility of ancient humans having a '900+ year' life span?

All evidence that we have says otherwise. Not saying that it isn't possible, but why don't people live that long these days?

You're free to correct me, but it appears that Adam only named the livestock, birds and wild animals that were brought to him. Perhaps you have inside information on which livestock, which birds and which wild animals.

I wish I did. That would be amazing. Imagine finding a list of animals and their description written by Adam himself.

You state that you read the article. How big do you interpret the biblical flood to have been?

I have no Idea how big it was. But remember people thought the world was flat and had no idea of how big the world was or how many continents are on it. Imagine you lived in an area all your life, traveled a bit here and there but never too far. That would be all you knew. Now imagine the whole area flooded. You would assume all the world was flooded as well.

[fractured_kidult]

Originally Posted by QuixoticHobbit

Good points - but again, the entire story of Noah and his ark was plagiarized off of the much earlier Sumerian flood story. Even if there were an ark to be found, it would not in any way prove the Bible to be true or accurate. It would be pretty good evidence for the Epic of Gilgamesh and Enki, Enlil and other Sumerian gods, however..

Actually almost every ancient culture has a Great flood story. They don't know where they all originated from or if they were separate events.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Peter and the eleven and many thousands of early believers:

"We are willing to die for this symbolism!"

I agree, it's highly unlikely that anyone would willingly die for a lie. Therefore it's obvious that the things they died for they believed to be true. Unfortunately for them, what they believed to be true and what actually is true are two separate things. In other words, the fact that one ardently believes something to be true does not make it true. Millions have people have died for their beliefs. They always have and always will but it doesn't follow that what they believed was true. By your logic we should accept that Koresh was JC huh?

When Hale-Bopp appeared in '97, an amateur astronomer reported an unidentified object "following" the comet in its tail. It turned out to be a star that was nowhere near the comet but 39 members of Heaven's Gate knew that Jesus was waiting for them on the spaceship in Hale-Bopp's tail. They knew he had come to take them away to a distant planet. They knew if they took phenobarbital with a vodka chaser and tied a plastic bag over their heads, they could join Jesus on his secret spaceship disguised as a star. They knew it with such certainty that they took Phenobarbital with a vodka chaser and tied plastic bags over their heads......were they right?

Not to mention that Saul, who later became the apostle Paul, was changed when he met a mere symbolism on the road to Damascus. Are you serious?

Already debunked. Paul never met Jesus in the flesh.

Originally Posted by tigetmax24

Given your apparent predicament, the choice to bail out is certainly understandable.

"Bail out"!! You surely jest? I'm still waiting for you to provide your evidence that that the Bible is historical fact by showing just how the Pharaohs I listed died in this flood thus showing that the whole recorded history of Egypt is wrong. I'm still waiting for you to present verifiable evidence of just when it was that Egypt was a desolate wasteland, devoid of man and beast for 40 years. From what I've seen so far you appear to be agreeing that the Bible is full of metaphor, symbolism and poetry. If that is the case then it isn't historical fact. If the Bible says that the world was flooded to a depth that covered the highest mountains yet you claim that this is just symbolic or metaphor then you must agree that (being symbolic) it didn't happen. Therefore, the Bible is not historical fact when it says that it did happen. Easy enough to understand really.

What would be so difficult about coming forward with just a little bit of integrity and admitting that you really have no good reasons to dismiss the existence of God, no reasonable way to falsify the Bible or Christianity?

I have already given you that evidence in previous posts. I suggest you go back and read it again.

It's not that the evidence is lacking, it's simply your choice to reject evidence and reasoning that you know in your heart to be sound and true.

I have seen no evidence. What is your verifiable evidence that the Egyptians were wiped out in a global flood thus showing that the Bible is historical fact. What is your verifiable evidence that millions of people wandered around the Sinai dessert for 40 years without leaving a trace of their passing, thus proving that the Bible is historical fact. What is your verifiable evidence that Egypt was a desolate wasteland for 40 years, thus proving that the Bible is historical fact. Present your objective, verifiable evidence. Put up or shut up.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by tigetmax24

You state that you read the article. How big do you interpret the biblical flood to have been?

Didn't your man-god himself claim that Noah was a real person and that the global flood happened? Yet you appear to be claiming that the flood was symbolic or metaphor. Do you doubt the words of your man-god JC?

As for "interpretation", that's just a cop out. I pick up texts all the time and read them. I've never had to have a list of rules for reading them. That's why the Bible was translated. Understanding the language you're reading is sufficient. That's the whole point of language, you don't have to re-learn the communications methods for every message. People only try to come up with such rules for reading a document when they're attempting to evade what the document says. That's the kind of thing attorney's do to discredit a written confession submitted by their client. Such tactics don't lead to more accurate understanding. They lead to an evasion of understanding. The verses in the Bible are very clear. There is no set of rules necessary to understand what they say.

If you read what the book says, you'll garner its meaning. If you instead avoid what the book says and pursue concepts more to your liking, then all you're going to end up with are your own desires. This is very popular within Christianity. It's so popular, in fact, that there are more than 38,000 different versions of what the Bible is proclaimed to say. None of them are consistent with the actual words of the Bible.

Have you noticed that you've been reading my posts and responding to them? Have you noticed that I've never published a set of rules as to how my words should be interpreted? What makes you think you have the slightest idea what my words are saying since you're not equipped with a set of rules with which to read them?

Now it appears to me that when you want to proclaim you understand what words say, you can read them without any such list of rules or interpretations or hermeneutics. But when you don't like what something says, yet can't dispute the actually wording, you instead imply that a special set of rules is necessary. I'm sure this isn't an original idea. I'm sure you've had others tell you this is the way language works. Here's the news; they're wrong. They were wrong when they told you that and they're wrong now. And as long as you adhere to their false claims, you'll be just as wrong. And your proof for that is that you can understand what I'm saying without the list of rules you've been convinced you must have.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by tigetmax24

Perhaps it's a guilt thing...why else would you bother to argue?

Are you arguing because you are not sure of your faith?

[rifleman]

First off, Rafi's post #54 is classically elegant and eloquent. It puts the obtuse reasoning of others here in their place. They regularly conflate logic with what they fervently hope to believe. The oddball conclusions, for instance, that because millions are willing to die for something, that simply makes it fact. Hmmmm. Perhaps this poster didn't read about the Kaiser's or Hitler's God-guided troops in both World Wars. Both had God on their side, I'll remind. The guy claiming to be on our side musta been a faker....

Originally Posted by Eusebius

"We know . . . ."? You mean "Some people think . . . ." As long as you realize that the "We" in your sentence above stands not for everyone of intelligence.

I'm willing to bet if they found again Noah's ship in the mountains of Ararat that you and your group of "We" would still find reasons for not believing it. Your group would probably say: Well, it was probably built there by Christians in the middle ages to fool people into thinking the story was true. Or that it isn't really a ship. Or it was some hotel built by the Chinese or Tibetans as a summer resort thousand of years ago. ANYTHING BUT THE TRUTH!!!

Again, your fervent desire that, for example, the persistent Noah's Ark fable be somehow plausible and factual is a sure sign of your IDT* status. Unable to comprehend the obvious facts of a situation, and yet to confidently equivocate it with fables, story-telling and ancient constructs.

You seem to think the opinions of some event, carefully reviewed by scholarly thinkers (those who actually look into things for decades or even centuries, since well-recorded scientific work can be built-on and continued by your students. They do so by evaluating, comparing, applying stats and history and the valid opinions of other credible thinkers in the area of concern.

By comparison, this structured and reproducible approach is simply not as valid as the untutored but wishful childhood memories of an old Noah's Ark Sunday School comic book presentation showing, predictably, two elephant heads, two giraffe necks, two lambs, etc.

Q: where's the mandatory salt-to-fresh-water processor system and waste water treatment plant (with of course, solar cells for the equally necessary electrical pump power) for literally 180 million on-board passengers? At minimum.

This would be quite funny if it wasn't so intellectually sad.

Originally Posted by Eusebius

The writers of the New Testament believed the historical account of a global flood to be true. They spoke of Noah as being a real person and the global flood as an historical account. In fact if Noah was just a fictitious person then Christ's whole genealogy goes to pot . . . not that you'd care if it did or not since you aren't interested in the truth but rather your own agenda. . . the "We" agenda.

What rubbish. But yes, in fact, you're right! As we've been telling you, the entire Christianity thing, including Christ's entire genealogy, may just be a big lie. It's the conclusion I personally came to 35 years ago, after well over 10 years of intensive personal soul-searching and education, leading me inerrantly away from an obedient but unquestioning Christian lifestyle, and it's certainly also what the inescapable technical back-story leads to.

What the writers of the NT "believed" can be quite different from the truth. We know that, for instance, the Noah's Ark flood story truly is a keystone in the Christian need for just such a morale tale, and they "glommed on" to older Greek and even other older versions when they recognized it's "shock and awe" value.

Unfortunately, absent total MAGIC, it simply cannot have happened, ever, due to major factually based and required elements in the technical arenas of hydrology, geology, meteorology, ecology, biology, animal and plant reproduction, boat construction and engineering, food and water requirements to sustain samples of all 35+M organisms (X 50 per each type in general...) that had to have been on that barge, and so on.

Really; trust me; there's even more, all existing in concert to step firmly on the neck of an ancient but now totally outmoded and useless fairytale.

Not to mention the well recorded written histories of contemporaneous and scientifically far more advanced cultures who oddly failed to mention, ever, a globally catastrophic, completely inundating flood of well over 18 months duration. An event that completely wiped them, their cities, livestock, crops lands and peoples all out. All while, for instance, some of them continued to build great pyramids, walls, structures , libraries, water systems, etc. etc.

But then IDTrs* blithely try to compare as somehow equally valid, those obvious, globally recorded facts (plus the modern geo- and eco-forensic evaluations that have followed) against the original oral chants by one or two (probably drunken or high on 'shrooms...), technically illiterate author(s) who much later translated those old oral stories into modified and exaggerated biblical fables, originating in the very primitive and just-awakening culture of the day. This is especially egregious when compared to, let's say, the Chinese, Japanese or other world explorers' co-documented notes of the time.
_______________

*IDTr: Intransigent Dogmo-Theist

Originally Posted by WonderingWanderer

Mark, huh? Really.

Excellent summary WW: thanks for this one. Of course, it's obvious logic will be summarily dismissed (if it's even watched...) with a claim that it's just one guy's "beliefs" versus those equally valid "beliefs" of someone else who has not ever bothered to even begin to think through the points provided by this thoughtful academic.

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Peter and the eleven and many thousands of early believers:

"We are willing to die for this symbolism!"

Yup. That's proof all right!: thousands of unthinking follower/believers stampeding off the cliffs. Google "lemming behavior" please.

Originally Posted by tigetmax24

...says you, and we all know what opinions are like.

It seems to me that the great problem with this view has to do with the concept of truth. It's theoretically possible for all 'religions' to be false, but they can't all be true. This rule would also apply to Biblical hermeneutics. You're certainly entitled to believe the Bible is false but you've failed to make much of a case to support your opinion.

Again, we don't just mumble our "opinions". Rather, it's been proven here on C-D time and again, including direct questions to you, tm, that the typical Christian response to a dedicated, sincere question from an atheists about some aspect of a biblical story is to 1) ignore the question, or 2a) deflect the question by changing the topic or 2b) insult the questioner's motives, intellect or ability to reason.

But the bottom line and immutable Golden Rule? Never answer the question, since a truly adjudicated and logic-driven open debate with honest answers provided would kill any and all of the lines of reasoning provided by Christian apologists.

Your final errant statement that we have failed to make much of a case is due entirely to your inability to see truth when it hits you in the face.

Originally Posted by tigetmax24

Are we to take the '900+ years' literally? Where is your evidence or reason for discounting the possibility of ancient humans having a '900+ year' life span?

Simple. There's no other notation of it, only where it's convenient in the case of Noah. And of course, that medical fact's (that people don't live to 900+ yrs..) a lot easier to accept, since, even given modern medicine and knowledge about the causes of many types of disease affliction, we just don't make it nowadays, even to 150 yrs., let alone 900+.

I mean, let's just be rational for a moment, and not jump on the next fairytale that happens by, just so we can be "shocked and awe-struck" by our chosen mythology book. OK?

Originally Posted by tigetmax24

Given your apparent predicament, the choice to bail out is certainly understandable.

What would be so difficult about coming forward *with just a little bit of integrity* and admitting that you really have no good reasons to dismiss the existence of God, no reasonable way to falsify the Bible or Christianity? It's not that the evidence is lacking, it's simply your choice to reject evidence and reasoning that you know in your heart to be sound and true.

Perhaps it's a guilt thing...why else would you bother to argue?

Us *coming forward with just a little bit of integrity*? OK then: Q: do you admit that the majority of purely technical reasons to refute an actual Noah's Ark flood are rational? Answer me that lone question, OK?

{I'll happily give you one in return: there may be a larger intelligence out there in the universe; I freely admit it and ponder it often. Your turn.}

Fact: we have plenty to falsify the bible with. Noah's Ark's utter lack of credibility is easily lost and drowned in all the other implausible story lines of amazing deeds and accomplishments (how many millions of people were wandering the deserts fror 40+ years, absent any visible remnants or byproducts, no crop plantations, food storage, distribution, management and preservation, no sources of potable water, no medical help,no birthing records, no protection from sandstorms, no livestock, no basic functioning government system, and on and on forever.

Did it happen exactly as described, literally, in your inerrant bible? You tell me, but don't just say yes, because you believe it did. not enough.)

That's all just "Oh, but that's OK: they didn't need such luxury amenities! God took them by the hand!". But then, Carbon 14 or fission-tracking dating is "not precise enough" for you (unless off course, you happen to need it to be..); all the ecological and physics rules of engagement, geology, hydrology, biochemistry; all just whimsically tossed out the window because, in concert, they OBVIOUSLY don't allow such fairy tales to work. At all.

Then, casually and regardless of these irrefutable facts, you claim we have nothing? How Convenient. And not only that, you don't see how truly silly all this makes your "arguments" look.

(the following is slightly edited for brevity, but some of his best points...)

Originally Posted by Rafius

I agree, it's highly unlikely that anyone would willingly die for a lie. Therefore it's obvious that the things they died for they believed to be true.

When Hale-Bopp appeared in '97, an amateur astronomer reported an unidentified object "following" the comet in its tail. It turned out to be a star that was nowhere near the comet but 39 members of Heaven's Gate knew that Jesus was waiting for them on the spaceship in Hale-Bopp's tail.

.....were they right?

I'm still waiting for you to provide your evidence that that the Bible is historical fact by showing just how the Pharaohs I listed died in this flood thus showing that the whole recorded history of Egypt is wrong.

I'm still waiting for you to present verifiable evidence of just when it was that Egypt was a desolate wasteland, devoid of man and beast for 40 years.

From what I've seen so far you appear to be agreeing that the Bible is full of metaphor, symbolism and poetry. If that is the case then it isn't historical fact. If the Bible says that the world was flooded to a depth that covered the highest mountains yet you claim that this is just symbolic or metaphor then you must agree that (being symbolic) it didn't happen.

Therefore, the Bible is not historical fact when it says that it did happen. Easy enough to understand really.

Present your objective, verifiable evidence. Put up or shut up.

I'm sure he'll get right back to you on each of your points of logic, Rafius. Let's give him time. He'll prove me wrong when I stated that they never answer specific points without deflection or insult.

Honest.

He'll be right back.

[InsaneInDaMembrane]

Originally Posted by Rafius

Didn't your man-god himself claim that Noah was a real person and that the global flood happened? Yet you appear to be claiming that the flood was symbolic or metaphor. Do you doubt the words of your man-god JC?

As for "interpretation", that's just a cop out. I pick up texts all the time and read them. I've never had to have a list of rules for reading them. That's why the Bible was translated. Understanding the language you're reading is sufficient. That's the whole point of language, you don't have to re-learn the communications methods for every message. People only try to come up with such rules for reading a document when they're attempting to evade what the document says. That's the kind of thing attorney's do to discredit a written confession submitted by their client. Such tactics don't lead to more accurate understanding. They lead to an evasion of understanding. The verses in the Bible are very clear. There is no set of rules necessary to understand what they say.

If you read what the book says, you'll garner its meaning. If you instead avoid what the book says and pursue concepts more to your liking, then all you're going to end up with are your own desires. This is very popular within Christianity. It's so popular, in fact, that there are more than 38,000 different versions of what the Bible is proclaimed to say. None of them are consistent with the actual words of the Bible.

Have you noticed that you've been reading my posts and responding to them? Have you noticed that I've never published a set of rules as to how my words should be interpreted? What makes you think you have the slightest idea what my words are saying since you're not equipped with a set of rules with which to read them?

Now it appears to me that when you want to proclaim you understand what words say, you can read them without any such list of rules or interpretations or hermeneutics. But when you don't like what something says, yet can't dispute the actually wording, you instead imply that a special set of rules is necessary. I'm sure this isn't an original idea. I'm sure you've had others tell you this is the way language works. Here's the news; they're wrong. They were wrong when they told you that and they're wrong now. And as long as you adhere to their false claims, you'll be just as wrong. And your proof for that is that you can understand what I'm saying without the list of rules you've been convinced you must have.

I really love how you put this, dude. I've got to save it somewhere for future reference.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Peter and the eleven and many thousands of early believers:

"We are willing to die for this symbolism!"

So, Emperor Hirohito of Japan really was a god.... because hundreds of thousands of Japanese soldiers willingly sacrificed their lives in WWII, went to their deaths believing that they were dying for their god. So it must have been true huh? How say you?

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane

I really love how you put this, dude. I've got to save it somewhere for future reference.

I shall expect a cheque in the post.

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by Rafius

So, Emperor Hirohito of Japan really was a god.... because hundreds of thousands of Japanese soldiers willingly sacrificed their lives in WWII, went to their deaths believing that they were dying for their god. So it must have been true huh? How say you?

Well the problem with your arguement is that Peter actually saw the evidence. He saw the works of Christ that were supernatural. Those who believed that Hirohito of Japan was a God, did so based on blind faith. And there was no supernatural evidence showing those blind faith believers that he was God. Over the years the God of the Bible Jesus Christ has shown me the evidence of His reality. And He did this in supernatural ways. My belief in Christ has nothing to do with the numbers of people who follow Him. It has everything to do with the encounters I have actually had with Him.