Are Old Testament Stories Allegory or Literal History?

[ClearwaterVol]

It sure is, mostly by the ones who are atheists and agnostics.

Does that make one a bigot?

 

[Deputy Fife]

How exactly is a belief that one's life will continue in some capacity after the brain has completely decomposed, that a man was resurrected three days after death, more rational than a belief in Jonah and the whale, Noah's Ark, a 6-10 thousand year old universe, etc.?

What evidence points to the uniqueness of human death in the animal kingdom? Why would the end result differ from what a chimp, dolphin, pig, duck, snail, barracuda, crocodile, salamander, blue jay, crayfish, or earthworm would expect to happen to it after death?

 

[Sandvol]

Me want to pick fight with Christians-ugh!

 

[PKT_VOL]

I was wanting to hear more on your viewpoint of what ID consists of. From what I have read there are a few different schools of thought.

Yep. Depends on how narrow or broad your ID encompasses.

ID is dominated by Christians. Thus, it is no surprise that ID generally reflects broad/general Christian theology.

1) Creator (normally omnipotent and omniscient due to Christianity; can be aliens)

2) Platonic Forms

3) Aristotelian Final Causes

4) 1 and 3 combine for some sort of an interaction/caring of creation by creator

 

[VolsSportsFan]

It sure is, mostly by the ones who are atheists and agnostics.

Um you're the one who threw it around.

 

[n_huffhines]

It sure is, mostly by the ones who are atheists and agnostics.

Wait, you are saying VN atheists use "bigot" loosely against the religious here? Provide one example.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Gentlemen I have enjoyed it. I dont know why but I do enjoy debating you Godless Heathens. I really hate to admit it but over the years here on VN, I have learned some things about science and you heathens have forced me to do some deeper digging into the sciences. With that said I will never believe man can date anything back in time to anything as precise as 5.7 billion years or 16.8 billion years. I think they can date back and legitimately say x is millions or billions of years old. I think that is as good as they can do.

Til the next time we battle, I wish each and everyone of you the best.

You don't want to hear it but I am sincerely going to pray that every one of you find God one day while you are still walking on this earth.

:hi:

And you don't want to hear this: you are exactly what you accused others of being in this thread. Earlier you posted this:

There is sufficient evidence for the open minded person to show yes Jesus actually lived., for those that have an agenda to deny Jesus lived, they will not accept the evidence.

As you and I both are well aware, you and a few others on here would not accept anything that validates that yes Christ did walk this earth 2,000 years ago. No I cannot prove to you absolutely that Jesus lived on Earth 2,000 years ago, however there is sufficient evidence to show he did.

You say that people won't accept any evidence that Jesus lived because of agenda, but apparentley you have some projection issues because you just flat out said no matter what you're not going to believe what science has found as the precise ages of things from long ago. So who exactly has the agenda here?

 

[Roustabout]

Just some info. Regarding age of the earth, flood, etc.
There are many opinions within Christendom on the age of the earth.
The bible does not say how old the earth is. Some have extrapolated from OT geneologies how old the earth might be. However, rejecting this hard, literal method doesn't invalidate the Bible, since the bible itself never makes this claim.

Someone earlier in the thread asked, where did the flood waters go and how did the species get to different continents. These are asked as if global flood theory proponents don't have an explanation. They do. You may reject it and the theory may conflict with mainstream sceintific theory, but that doesn't mean there aren't explanations. Science agrees with Pangea, as well as a primitive earth completely covered in water. Where did the water go? It is a fact that if you flattened existing mountian ranges and oceanic valleys, the current earth would be entirely submerged under 2 kilometers of water. That isn't an opinion, but a fact.

So, a global flood proponent would propose that Pangea was the state of the world before the flood and that through the violent events, such as massive earthquakes and tectonic activity, the continents split and and formed the mountains and ocean valleys we now see. It is also a fact that if tectoninc activity occurred at the rates we now witness, you could not form massive mountain ranges. Erosion would denegrate the surface faster than the ranges could arise. You simply could not have the earth today without a completely submerged earth and catastrophism. Certainly, the time frame global flood theorist propose is in conflict with the scientific community. That brings us to my next point.
Many modern and ancient Christians believe(d) in an eternal universe and an old earth. Here is one of many sites that explain an old earth flood theory as a large, but localized event. And it does so by explaining idiomatic issues within the biblical text.
The Genesis Flood: Why the Bible Says It Must be Local

 

[Roustabout]

Yep. Depends on how narrow or broad your ID encompasses.

ID is dominated by Christians. Thus, it is no surprise that ID generally reflects broad/general Christian theology.

1) Creator (normally omnipotent and omniscient due to Christianity; can be aliens)

2) Platonic Forms

3) Aristotelian Final Causes

4) 1 and 3 combine for some sort of an interaction/caring of creation by creator

I suggest anyone wanting to understand ID study the actual ID scientists and not internet opinions of people who think they understand ID.
There are ID scientist who are NOT Christian although rare. But that is really about presuppositions. Metaphysical Naturalism is a philosophy not a scientific fact. If you start from a closed system (the cosmos is all there is, was and ever will be, ie. Sagan) then your thinking will flow from that. In fact, it CANNOT consider anything else, even if the evidence suggest otherwise. ID simply takes what Dawkins claims about things showing the appearance of design and postulates that this might actually infer a designer. Formal ID research makes NO religious claims about who or what this designer might be.

 

[PKT_VOL]

I suggest anyone wanting to understand ID study the actual ID scientists and not internet opinions of people who think they understand ID.
There are ID scientist who are NOT Christian although rare. But that is really about presuppositions. Metaphysical Naturalism is a philosophy not a scientific fact. If you start from a closed system (the cosmos is all there is, was and ever will be, ie. Sagan) then your thinking will flow from that. In fact, it CANNOT consider anything else, even if the evidence suggest otherwise. ID simply takes what Dawkins claims about things showing the appearance of design and postulates that this might actually infer a designer. Formal ID research makes NO religious claims about who or what this designer might be.

What specifically are you disputing in my post?

 

[Deputy Fife]

And it does so by explaining idiomatic issues within the biblical text.

Why does God need people like you and William Lane Craig to explain and qualify and apologize? Why wouldn't He either author a book that's clear and timeless or issue new sequels for different times?

Why is there nothing in the Bible delineating the crucial issue of sexual consent? Why do roughly half of the Ten Commandments have nothing to do with morality? Why is there no commandment against rape? Why is there nothing establishing the equality of the sexes? Why is it theologically defensible to say that a wife cannot possibly be raped by her husband?

Why does God strike someone dead for looking into the Ark of the Covenant but not for sacrificing a human to Him?

 

[tumscalcium]

Why does God need people like you and William Lane Craig to explain and qualify and apologize? Why wouldn't He either author a book that's clear and timeless or issue new sequels for different times?

Why is there nothing in the Bible delineating the crucial issue of sexual consent? Why do roughly half of the Ten Commandments have nothing to do with morality? Why is there no commandment against rape? Why is there nothing establishing the equality of the sexes? Why is it theologically defensible to say that a wife cannot possibly be raped by her husband?

Why does God strike someone dead for looking into the Ark of the Covenant but not for sacrificing a human to Him?

I'm not religious and even I can see this post as just jumbo drivel. Why would the Bible address every single conceivable scenario in the universe? I can't see why any religious book would have to include every single thing ever.

 

[Deputy Fife]

Regarding sex, how would society benefit from following the Bible rather than this?

At puberty, the elements of an unsuperstitious sexual morality ought to be taught. Boys and girls should be taught that nothing can justify sexual intercourse unless there is mutual inclination. This is contrary to the teaching of the Church, which holds that, provided the parties are married and the man desires another child, sexual intercourse is justified however great may be the reluctance of the wife. Boys and girls should be taught respect for each other’s liberty; they should be made to feel that nothing gives one human being rights over another, and that jealousy and possessiveness kill love. They should be taught that to bring another human being into the world is a very serious matter, only to be undertaken when the child will have a reasonable prospect of health, good surroundings, and parental care. But they should also be taught methods of birth control, so as to insure that children shall only come when they are wanted. -Bertrand Russell

 

[Roustabout]

What specifically are you disputing in my post?

I don't see where i disputed anything. Just adding to what you stated.

 

[Roustabout]

Why does God need people like you and William Lane Craig to explain and qualify and apologize? Why wouldn't He either author a book that's clear and timeless or issue new sequels for different times?

Why is there nothing in the Bible delineating the crucial issue of sexual consent? Why do roughly half of the Ten Commandments have nothing to do with morality? Why is there no commandment against rape? Why is there nothing establishing the equality of the sexes? Why is it theologically defensible to say that a wife cannot possibly be raped by her husband?

Why does God strike someone dead for looking into the Ark of the Covenant but not for sacrificing a human to Him?

This is called elephant hurling. you just throw a pile of objections, most of which have been asked and answered a zillion times. If i thought fore one second you were the slightest bit interested in an answer I'd have a dialogue. You've demonstrated by your own words that you don't give two ****s about understanding anything.

There is plenty in the bible, NT and OT about establishing the gender roles. Just because you don't subscribe to these roles doesn't mean they are wrong.

Fife asks a question about why does God do this and not that. All this means is that God doesn't submit to Fife's wishes. This isn't a proof for or against god. It's just incredulity. Because even if an example and explanation were provided (and they have been) it WOULDN'T matter.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

This is called elephant hurling. you just throw a pile of objections, most of which have been asked and answered a zillion times. If i thought fore one second you were the slightest bit interested in an answer I'd have a dialogue. You've demonstrated by your own words that you don't give two ****s about understanding anything.

There is plenty in the bible, NT and OT about establishing the gender roles. Just because you don't subscribe to these roles doesn't mean they are wrong.

Fife asks a question about why does God do this and not that. All this means is that God doesn't submit to Fife's wishes. This isn't a proof for or against god. It's just incredulity. Because even if an example and explanation were provided (and they have been) it WOULDN'T matter.

Dont waste your time. Barney is a clown shoes atheist.

 

[Deputy Fife]

I'm not religious and even I can see this post as just jumbo drivel. Why would the Bible address every single conceivable scenario in the universe? I can't see why any religious book would have to include every single thing ever.

Although I find the assertion dubious at best, I'm open to the possibility that the Bible offered a better morality relative to other ancient cultures. I won't even dismiss outright the possibility that Christianity/monotheism is/has been necessary for the formation of civil society, though I'd like to think of the human race in a better light.

However, the claim on offer is that the Bible represents the word of the creator of the universe, the omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipotent eternal father. Forgive me for heightening my standards in light of that claim.

The issues I've raised are extremely important, and God found more than enough room in the Bible to lay out in painstaking detail and profundity the exact procedures for animal sacrifice and recipes for perfume.

In short, if the Bible were truly the product of omniscience, it shouldn't matter that it was written thousands of years ago while my life began in 1994; I still shouldn't be able to write a better book than God.

 

[Gramps]

Although I find the assertion dubious at best, I'm open to the possibility that the Bible offered a better morality relative to other ancient cultures. I won't even dismiss outright the possibility that Christianity/monotheism is/has been necessary for the formation of civil society, though I'd like to think of the human race in a better light.

However, the claim on offer is that the Bible represents the word of the creator of the universe, the omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipotent eternal father. Forgive me for heightening my standards in light of that claim.

The issues I've raised are extremely important, and God found more than enough room in the Bible to lay out in painstaking detail and profundity the exact procedures for animal sacrifice and recipes for perfume.

In short, if the Bible were truly the product of omniscience, it shouldn't matter that it was written thousands of years ago while my life began in 1994; I still shouldn't be able to write a better book than God.

You can't

 

[Deputy Fife]

You've demonstrated by your own words that you don't give two ****s about understanding anything.

As have you

There is plenty in the bible, NT and OT about establishing the gender roles. Just because you don't subscribe to these roles doesn't mean they are wrong.

What constitutes wrong in your book? What's different about a girl that allows her to enjoy being treated like chattel? Those roles were written by males for males. Congrats on beating Islam in that regard, barely.

Because even if an example and explanation were provided (and they have been) it WOULDN'T matter.

Your "explanations" haven't been arrived upon via valid truth pathways. They deserve nothing but verbal abuse.

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

In short, if the Bible were truly the product of omniscience, it shouldn't matter that it was written thousands of years ago while my life began in 1994; I still shouldn't be able to write a better book than God.

You're giving yourself way too much credit... other than being able to use Google, Copy and Paste.

 

[volfanhill]

If you think the bible is literall then you have no understanding how it was put together.

 

[rjd970]

You can't

I could improve the Bible by leaps and bounds in 5 minutes.

 

[Gramps]

I could improve the Bible by leaps and bounds in 5 minutes.

You could CHANGE it not improve it. Some of the popular English versions do that every few years to fit society's lifestyle.

 

[Deputy Fife]

You could CHANGE it not improve it.

How would the Bible not benefit from having the following passages removed?

Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power

If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.

45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

6 Let as many bondservants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and His doctrine may not be blasphemed. 2 And those who have believing masters, let them not despise them because they are brethren, but rather serve them because those who are benefited are believers and beloved. Teach and exhort these things.

3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, 4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions.

Is this the kind of moral insight that gave women suffrage, abolished slavery, and allowed for peaceful relations between different cultures? Would an enlightened being prescribe and exalt tribalism?

Is it possible that the Bible could not have been written by uninspired men? that the assistance of God was necessary to produce these books? Is it possible that Galilei ascertained the mechanical principles of 'Virtual Velocity,' the laws of falling bodies and of all motion; that Copernicus ascertained the true position of the earth and accounted for all celestial phenomena; that Kepler discovered his three laws—discoveries of such importance that the 8th of May, 1618, may be called the birth-day of modern science; that Newton gave to the world the Method of Fluxions, the Theory of Universal Gravitation, and the Decomposition of Light; that Euclid, Cavalieri, Descartes, and Leibniz, almost completed the science of mathematics; that all the discoveries in optics, hydrostatics, pneumatics and chemistry, the experiments, discoveries, and inventions of Galvani, Volta, Franklin and Morse, of Trevithick, Watt and Fulton and of all the pioneers of progress—that all this was accomplished by uninspired men, while the writers of the Bible were directed and inspired by an infinite God? Is it possible that the codes of China, India, Egypt, Greece and Rome were made by man, and that the laws recorded in the Pentateuch were alone given by God? Is it possible that Æschylus and Shakespeare, Burns, and Beranger, Goethe and Schiller, and all the poets of the world, and all their wondrous tragedies and songs are but the work of men, while no intelligence except the infinite God could be the author of the Bible? Is it possible that of all the books that crowd the libraries of the world, the books of science, fiction, history and song, that all save only one, have been produced by man? Is it possible that of all these, the Bible only is the work of God? -Robert Ingersoll

 

[rjd970]

How would the Bible not benefit from having the following passages removed?

Is this the kind of moral insight that gave women suffrage, abolished slavery, and allowed for peaceful relations between different cultures? Would an enlightened being prescribe and exalt tribalism?

I would also add there are tedious passages outlining all sorts of mundane things from animal sacrifice, how to keep slaves, when to beat your kids, and who and why to kill someone. There isn't a single passage in the entire text that couldn't have be written by somebody in the first century. Hell, tearing Leviticus and Dueteronomy out of your Bible right now would be an upgrade and IMPROVEMENT to the current text.