Raf

Like like like like like

Nice try, but we're discussing the Bible, I'm pointing out the errors, and you're ignoring them. So there's that. In the meantime, I spent 40 years devoted to the presumption you call "truth," and I find it never held up to honest inquiry. So for you to come along now and say I'm ignoring it... sorry, pal, but it rings a little hollow. I've got too much of a track record for you to get away with lying about me so shamelessly. Try again.

That's fine. And I have neither the time nor the interest to study the articles you wrote, which no doubt presume the integrity of a book riddled with errors you choose to ignore. No sweat off my brow.

Maybe the truth is the Bible doesn't hold up to genuine scrutiny. Perhaps your approach of attacking me rather than defending it is an indication of who's really being dishonest here. Obviously the truth doesn't come from me. It comes from the Bible! As long as you ignore all of its actual errors. You know, like the gigantic dome we all live under.

I am not being dishonest and have not been dishonest. I expect and demand an apology for this deliberate character assassination and deliberate derailing of this topic. Defend Genesis on its merits or butt out of this conversation. Keep making it about me and I will respond accordingly. Once again, this is not a Christian forum. If you have a problem with that, it is YOUR problem, not the cafe's. If you don't like the fact that an atheist can read the Bible and call shenanigans when he sees it, there are plenty of forums on the Internet where open inquiry and honest debate are discouraged and you can live in a cocoon where there really are no errors in the bible as long as you don't open the thing. This is NOT one of those forums. So if you expect me to shut up because I no longer believe, if you expect me to NOT express myself when and where I feel it's appropriate, then TOO BAD FOR YOU. Just a reminder for those who think this is a Christians only ghetto of the Cafe. It isn't.

I WANT more people reading the Bible. The more you realize what this book really says, without being "blinded" by the so called "light," the more you will agree with me. Please, read as much of the Bible as you can! Especially the good parts, like when God takes a man's life for the unspeakable crime of picking up sticks on Saturday. PLEASE read more Bible! Not just the prepackaged feel good pablum we fed each other for decades. The whole thing. Because if you ever had the BALLS to do it, you would be standing where I am today, wondering why you didn't wake up sooner. You are implying that I am being dishonest. I reject your character assassination and demand an apology.

Uncalled for. Can't defend the myth, can't counter my argument, so go ahead and attack me personally. Uncalled for and intellectually bankrupt. This is not a Christian doctrinal forum. Perhaps you forgot that. I am pleased to remind you. The only one wasting people's time here is Mark. I am raising genuine questions about the reliability of Genesis, and Mark has derailed that conversation. Christians who don't want to participate don't need to. But if you want to participate, I suggest you participate in the topic. If you'd prefer to make it about me, then YOU are derailing the thread and I would ask you to stop.

Maybe I should say it in Spanish.

The whole idea of "spiritual truth" assumes spirit. I do not. Do I see some wisdom in Paul? Sure. I also see some ignorance, some bigotry, some obliviousness and some sexism. Do I believe Jesus existed? Most likely. Do I believe what's written about him? Mostly not. Most of this is fodder for another thread though. Can we get back to Genesis?

Yes. You're up

Not to mention that some of the advice is bad. "Lean not on your own understanding"? That's some bad advice right there.

Again, that's not to say there's nothing to be learned from the gospels or epistles. I just cut to the heart of your question.

No and no.

For what it's worth, The Way had a fairly ignorant understanding of evolution, playing off our own ignorance on the subject. Evolution does not predict a horse will breed with a cow and produce a cowey horse or a horsey cow.

I should pay some cursory attention to Genesis 1, but I really don't want to dwell on it. Taking it at face value: There is no way the creation of the earth in any way preceded the making of the sun. There is no way plant life developed on earth before there was a sun. There is no way there were three days and three nights before there even was a sun. The sun, moon and stars are not in a firmament as described in Genesis (unless you butcher the meaning of the word firmament, which is a solid structure surrounding the earth, which only makes sense if the earth is flat). Etc. And I'll do us all a favor and just leave evolution as the great unspoken of this thread. Unless, of course, someone wants to go there.

In case Mark missed it, I now feel this way about the whole Bible, not just Genesis. Not to say that there's nothing historical in it, or nothing that can be learned. I am simply no longer a "believer" in the sense that I have been and have presented myself on this board for so many years. So I'm coming at this all from a different framework than you. You are free to engage, to disengage, to argue, and of course to disagree.

It is a Baldwin, but I had the wrong one.

Sure. There's plenty I can learn from this story. But there's plenty I can learn from Aesop's Fables, Star Wars and the Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, too. Referring to a truth as "spiritual" assumes the existence of a "spiritual" plane, and that requires defining and accepting such a thing. There are other words that might convey a mutually agreeable meaning, and we can then look at this material from that perspective. In college, studying Genesis as literature, one professor noted that according to the story, "with the knowledge of good and evil comes a loss of innocence." Whether you accept this as historical, allegorical, divinely inspired or pure fantasy, I think honest people can agree that this is one of the messages that can be drawn from the tale. And for all I know, that WAS the original intent of the tale. We don't know who wrote it or why. We do know how it was received, accepted and represented over the course of history, and it's this latter view that I no longer accept.

Deleted. I was wrong about the lead actor.

Ok, but how far do we take that concept? What parts of Genesis are figurative rather than literal? Are the characters of Adam and Eve historical? Without getting too complicated, science/DNA/genetics has determined that they cannot have been historical, for a variety of reasons. Did a literal snake talk to Eve? If not, why did God punish snakes? If it was figurative, why is there no indication whatsoever that this is just an allegory? And how much of it is allegory? Did the original audience consider it a fictional allegory that is not history? What are the implications of that. Luke's genealogy of Jesus goes all the way back to Adam. Did he think Adam was a historical figure? Must have. I don't see evidence in the text that this is anything other than a factual account of what took place in Mesopotamia a few thousand years ago. And as a "factual" account, it strains credibility beyond the breaking point. Etc.

The flood of Noah's day is recorded in Genesis 6-8. I'm just going to handle it here in a cursory fashion, since I think going into intricate detail won't be necessary. The amount of debate generated may or may not lead me to go into further detail. The first thing that needs to be noted is the scale of the flood. God wants to destroy ALL of mankind. Not just men in a local area, but all men in every area. The notion that this was a local event is, in my opinion, an apologetic response to the rather clear evidence that such a flood could not have taken place as described. Taken on its own, Genesis clearly describes a worldwide phenomenon, not a local one. The flood covers mountains, after all. No local flood would have accomplished that. The ark is too small to fit two of every kind of animal in the world (never mind the logistics of bringing polar bears, panda bears and koalas to the middle east). Apologetic efforts to reduce the number of animals to a broad category of "kinds" do not solve the problem. There are simply too many animals in too little space to accomplish that goal. Noah is supposed to bring 7 pairs of every clean animal, and 2 pairs of every unclean animal. There is no prior scripture on which animals are clean and which are unclean (is there? I invite correction). The whole idea of "clean" and "unclean" animals had to do with whether or not we could eat them, and God had not given man permission to eat animals at this point. That happens after the flood. Speaking of animals after the flood, God says, "The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands." This is not true. Most fish in the sea go their entire lives blissfully unaware of man's existence. And lots of animals are not afraid of man at all. Then God says: "Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." Everything? That's some dangerous nutritional advice right there. Noah was 600 years old when the flood came (yeah right). We are not told how old his wife and sons were, so technically, I can't call this an error, but what do you think is the likelihood of a 600-year-old man being the father of three sons whose wives are still of childbearing age? "Ewww" is the only word that comes to mind. I mean, yeah, it's hypothetically possible, but we're still in Genesis when the thought of Sarah having a child at the age of 75 is literally laughed at. Conclusion: This story never happened. Not globally, not regionally, not at all. Obviously, there is MUCH more I could say to drive that point into the ground, but I'll limit myself for the sake of [relative] brevity.

Re:Noah, I thought the whole point on this thread was to be obvious.

George got it first

Midnight Cowboy "A great flood is coming. The waters of the heavens will meet the waters of earth. We build a vessel to survive the storm. We build an ark."

Beauty and the Beast The Power of Love Johnny B. Goode