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.
I'm not looking at it "both ways"...I am looking at it how it is, based upon current observations and our best info on "how things work". That some still get it wrong does not change that...except that they need to be clued in to a more valid view of it.
I am not religious...so I am not part of "you guys".
The ancients did not understand the actual technicalities of what they were able to observe...so they wrote philosophically through metaphor and allegory the best they could at the time.
You're not religious? And yet you posted: "But anything that happens or occurs...and any thought by any person or creature, is by and through God".
You're not religious? And yet you posted: "But anything that happens or occurs...and any thought by any person or creature, is by and through God".
Keep going. You have just perceived the Goldie paradox - he doesn't give a damn' about religion, but he will praise it to the skies to atheists, just to get a rise out of us.
It is a mistake to assess on a literal basis, the metaphorical and allegorical writings that are in The Bible relative to the inception of the Universe or evolution of living entities...written by those ancient "goat herders" that did not fully understand those things.
If they are metaphorical or allegorical, then they have no value, because they're entirely subjective.
That which is subjective, by definition, can neither be universal nor a universal truth.
If they are metaphorical or allegorical, then they have no value, because they're entirely subjective.
That which is subjective, by definition, can neither be universal nor a universal truth.
This is not very critical thinking. Too imprecise. What you probably mean to say is we can not KNOW if the subjective is universal or a universal truth, NOT that it is impossible.
This is not very critical thinking. Too imprecise. What you probably mean to say is we can not KNOW if the subjective is universal or a universal truth, NOT that it is impossible.
No, you're not doing critical thinking and are being imprecise. The writings, if seen as 'metaphorical' are not to be taken as reliable. We can't point to them as telling us anything true, other than how humans think.
Now there may be universal truths out there that science knows nothing of, but metaphorical writings can't be regarded as telling us anything about them. These 'truths' have to be demonstrated through some other method.
i can guess what's coming: 'but those metaphors and symbols tell un in a subjective way about unknown truths that can only be accessed through inspiration'.
But that is just a faith -claim. To validate it, you'd have to show that the Universals were true to be indicated by the metaphorical message, or it's no more than human fantasy.
No, you're not doing critical thinking and are being imprecise. The writings, if seen as 'metaphorical' are not to be taken as reliable. We can't point to them as telling us anything true, other than how humans think.
As a matter of simple fact, we can not KNOW that they reflect a universal truth, but we cannot conclusively say they cannot possibly do so. This kind of black and white, concrete nonsense permeates your views, Arq. Your desire to discard concepts and ideas that you cannot possibly vet is tedious. There is nothing we do NOT KNOW that you can conclusively discard so cavalierly as you do.
No...except for funerals and weddings.
I'm Pantheist.
Interesting.
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.