Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
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 only have one issue with this. You say the bible says what it says and that is all. There is no underlining meaning in the words on the pages. Am I right?
Writers in the past and present have written books, articles, papers and the like with underlining messages that are hidden in the words themselves. Many others use a character to represent something bigger. A boy who is struggling to get through life and making all the wrong decisions could represent mankind. Authors do this all the time. Especially in the past when freedom of speech didn't go over so well and usually ended in death, or very harsh punishment.
So to say that the Bible could not be another form of that is false. It very well could be symbolism mixed with some straight forward reading.
Psychiatrists do this all the time. They give clients journals to write in that only the doctor will see. They analyze it to try to see whats going on in your life. They also interpret things that you have written to try and understand a persons subconscious.
The written and spoken word does not just have to mean what the word means. It can and often does have a hidden meaning, sometimes just under the surface and other times it is too deep for most people to understand.
The written and spoken word does not just have to mean what the word means. It can and often does have a hidden meaning, sometimes just under the surface and other times it is too deep for most people to understand.
Placed in the hands of the simple minded...
I do agree with you to a point. The book of Revelation is a perfect example. Full of symbolism and hidden meanings considering the times the book was written in. The book of Daniel is another one. As I stated up top, place such books in the hands of folks 2,100 years later and you have a billion different interpretations. I mean, you have a large segment of the Christian population that believes the books actually refers to them and their times today. Yup, they're so vain. They realy think those books are about them.
I only have one issue with this. You say the bible says what it says and that is all. There is no underlining meaning in the words on the pages. Am I right?
The Bible says what it says. What is says is either correct or it isn't (as in 'the word of god'). If it says that the world was once flooded to above the highest mountain and everything on the planet was drowned, save Noah and his gang but in reality, that didn't happen..(the story is symbolic or metaphorical)...then the Bible is NOT historical fact is it? That is what the thread is about. The Bible stories may well be symbolic, poetry or metaphor but if it is, it can't be historical fact can it? Either the entire world was flooded as per the Bible story or the story is symbolic and therefore it isn't historical fact. Easy enough to understand don't you think?
I am the one who started this thread so I get it. I am just saying that it might not be 100% false, just inaccurate. Most ancient cultures write things that we know to be inaccurate, not false, just not the whole story. Ancient cultures did not know of all other cultures out there. Therefor they thought the ones they did know and themselves were the only ones.
I am just saying that it might not be 100% false, just inaccurate. Most ancient cultures write things that we know to be inaccurate, not false, just not the whole story. Ancient cultures did not know of all other cultures out there. Therefor they thought the ones they did know and themselves were the only ones.
So if it's inaccurate it's not historical fact is it?
Are you arguing because you are not sure of your faith?
Believe it or not, I take part in this forum and ask questions out of honest curiosity. Thus far, and in the vast majority of cases, it's proven to basically be a waste of time due to an apparent unwillingness to provide honest and concise answers or engage in honest, concise back-and-forth dialog.
While you probably think your filibuster approach to be impressive, the record speaks for itself. The declaration of the Bible being falsified by known historical fact was made in the OP and seconded by you. You were the one presenting yourself as some sort of Bible expert. I asked some questions - which I'm fully entitled to do given the nature of your claims. Instead, and as expected, you obfuscate and claim instead that I have some sort of obligation to defend the authenticity of the Bible.
You made the claims - you back them up. This would mean answering my questions which you won't do, I can only conclude, because an honest answer to my questions would undermine your arguments.
Believe it or not, I take part in this forum and ask questions out of honest curiosity. Thus far, and in the vast majority of cases, it's proven to basically be a waste of time due to an apparent unwillingness to provide honest and concise answers or engage in honest, concise back-and-forth dialog.
Oh pleeeeaaase!!!
Quote:
You made the claims - you back them up. This would mean answering my questions which you won't do, I can only conclude, because an honest answer to my questions would undermine your arguments.
...but I have backed them up. Please point out what questions I have not addressed. You asked me to give you some examples and I did so. I am now waiting for you to provide, with verifiable evidence, the time period when Egypt was a desolate wasteland for 40 years. You claimed that this period of desolation could well be in the future but I have shown by quoting the Bible itself that the period was to be at the time of the Pharaohs. That time has well gone and there has been no period when Egypt was a wasteland devoid of man and beast.
I am waiting for you to show, with verifiable evidence, how the Egyptians managed to survive the Biblical flood. I have shown, with the recorded history of Egypt, (the unbroken record of Egyptian Pharaohs), that there was no period when everyone in Egypt was wiped out by a global flood.
Your posts are here for all to see. You have not debunked my claims. All you have done is claim that the flood was 'symbolic' or 'it may not have been global', or this or that may not have happened in the way the Bible claims....all contrary to what the Bible says. You have claimed 'symbolism', metaphor, poetry' etc but nothing of substance, nothing that you can back up.
I have asked you to explain just how, if the flood was not global, how all life on the planet was wiped out. You haven't addressed that just like you haven't addressed anything else I have posted. You have just spluttered and blathered on about 'symbolism, metaphor and poetry' and of course, the apologists favourite....'interpretation'..
Produce your evidence to show that I'm wrong. Produce your evidence that the Egyptians were wiped out. Produce your evidence that the flood was only local. You can't can you? All you can do is claim that your opponent is avoiding your questions when everyone can clearly see that I have taken you on and soundly beaten you. You have no answers...only blather!
Humans can only keep up to around 5000 years of written history, while there's no specific years recorded in Noah's story. As a result, unbroken Egytian record proves none.
"No evidence for a global flood such that it didn't happen" is a logically flawed statement. If something is not evident which means "we don't know if it happened" instead of "we know that it didn't happen".
So if it's inaccurate it's not historical fact is it?
Not even what we know about history is 100% fact. Alot of History is piecing things together and creating theories until some more information comes along to confirm of change it.
At this point we know that the bible is not accurate in its history events. That does not mean that the history in the bible didnt happen, just that it might have happened differently or at a different time than stated in the bible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
