Is the Bible Allegorical or Literal?

[InChrist]

But what should a person know and believe about Jesus to have the right relationship with him? And those people should then be the true believers and the true Church shouldn't they?

Then what do you do with the people that believe a little differently? And they meet in a building around the corner from where you meet. And then around the corner from them is a group that believes slightly different from them. At what point are the differences so much that you call them wrong and not believers in the true Jesus?

All born again believers are a part of the Body of Christ or His church, wherever they are in the world. I know lots of Christians who meet at a church down the street, around the corner, across town or in different places. As I said previously, all believers who belong to Jesus Christ are in agreement on who Jesus is and on the essential foundational biblical doctrines. There is room for differences on non-essentials.

 

[exchemist]

Name one hypothesis of geology that is not testable.

You are the one with the "babble". Oh wait, when challenged you ran away.

The needle on my crank detector is in the “Turbo-Boost” sector.

 

[1213]

Good! The closest you can come to proof is the Bible itself, which is readily proven false in certain rather crucial passages.

Please show one example. I am sure you can't.

 

[1213]

Because some of it doesn't jive with known history. ....

And why you believe the "known history" is correct?

 

[Subduction Zone]

And why you believe the "known history" is correct?

Nice, an implied acceptance that the Bible is contradicted by history and a shifting of the burden of proof attempt. In other words, all but admitting that the Bible is wrong.

 

[Audie]

Please show one example. I am sure you can't.

I’m sure of that too. Or rather you could be shown , but would never see it.
There’s a saying, - “You can always tell a YEC, but you can’t tell them much.”.

But in response to your “please”, there is the flood story, disproved more ways than easily counted. The presence of polar ice predating any possible flood date, is one.

I’m sure you have an “explanation”. I’ve heard several conflicting
/ totally different ones. Each “True”. And Biblical.

Please give yours.

 

[Audie]

And why you believe the "known history" is correct?

One needs to be cautious about speaking of what is “known” or “ proved” when there is only a single source / no independent means of verification.

Don’t you think so?

 

[Audie]

All born again believers are a part of the Body of Christ or His church, wherever they are in the world. I know lots of Christians who meet at a church down the street, around the corner, across town or in different places. As I said previously, all believers who belong to Jesus Christ are in agreement on who Jesus is and on the essential foundational biblical doctrines. There is room for differences on non-essentials.

is the truth or falsity of a major section of the OT ( flood) a non essential?

 

[Audie]

Why not?

Because an educated person knows there area great many very solid reasons, and honest people do not speak falsehoods.

 

[Sand Dancer]

And why you believe the "known history" is correct?

Because it is the job of historians to look for evidence. Why choose against those who want to find out information vs stories from thousands of years ago when we didn't know as much?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There’s a saying, - “You can always tell a YEC, but you can’t tell them much.”.

Cute

 

[Audie]

Probably the real problem is that seekers too often are looking for perfect religion and they think Christianity is just another religion, it’s not. Years ago I was confused and I was looking for the right religion and the true church. Thankfully, I didn’t find one…I found Jesus or rather I realized it was Jesus and Him alone that I needed. What a difference between religion and a relationship with Jesus Christ! I think perfection and real love is found only in Christ.

Everyone thinks they had the luck or wisdom to find the one true faith.
So in that you are not so unique.

“ The problem(s)” as you might put it, being that at best, only one of the vast number can be correct. How very fortunate to get it right!

Another lil prob is that for all the “logic”, study, prayer, visions etc and blah that “ seekers” apply to their Quest, the choice, for such it is, a choice, is just based on feelings. Emotion.
Like puppy love.

 

[Audie]

Because it is the job of historians to look for evidence. Why choose against those who want to find out information vs stories from thousands of years ago when we didn't know as much?

What do you mean, “evidence”?

 

[Sand Dancer]

What do you mean, “evidence”?

What evidence or what is evidence? I guess archeologists would look for cities and human remains, among other types of things. They would have clues what to look for by reading what the bible espouses.

 

[Audie]

What evidence or what is evidence? I guess archeologists would look for cities and human remains, among other types of things. They would have clues what to look for by reading what the bible espouses.

I was looking for a general statement.

The evidence that seems to suit believers is in
their feelings. Some whose feelings need a boost may seek proof to confirm what they already think.
That is the route of self deception / intellectual dishonesty.

But what constitutes sound evidence for a researcher? I mentioned multiple sources, indecent confirmation.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I was looking for a general statement.

The evidence that seems to suit believers is in
their feelings. Some whose feelings need a boost may seek proof to confirm what they already think.
That is the route of self deception / intellectual dishonesty.

But what constitutes sound evidence for a researcher? I mentioned multiple sources, indecent confirmation.

Right. No real evidence would be enough I guess.

 

[Audie]

Right. No real evidence would be enough I guess.

Um, no real evidence for what?

 

[Apostle John]

I never suspected that you had any knowledge of science based on what you have posted. In fact, my conclusion was 'not a science guy'.

What evidence do you use to demonstrate the actions of a Creator or the presence of a Creator in the system you are loosely describing? That is the real question and one you should be able to answer and be able to provide the evidence.

That question...is it formed in a way a scientist would ask. Why do you need to go back to how molecules are formed. Wouldn't you be able to tell us, being a chemist and all? DNA is a molecule. It isn't conscious anymore than any other molecule that I'm aware of. Are you trying to ask how consciousness arose and that you cannot conceive of it arising without the actions of a Creator? If so, shouldn't you be showing us all of that, being that you claim it? That you cannot conceive of something, therefore what you want to believe is the actual answer is an argument from incredulity isn't it? That a definitive understanding of the origins of consciousness is unknown at the present means that something supernatural is the default correct answer is an argument from ignorance isn't it. A god of the gaps argument?

There's the logic too.

Look up the Haber process, the industrial process for making ammonia, made up of 4 atoms- 1 nitrogen and 3 hydrogen. Appreciate the effort that goes in for chemists to get the gases (reactants) to react.

Now consider human DNA which contains 23 chromosomes, containing about 8.5 billion atoms per chromosome. Humans will never be able to come anywhere close to making this from scratch. Everything in the physical world is made up of chemicals. They do not bump into each other haphazardly in nature and build up one by one into mega molecules like dna, even over billions of years. Think of atoms like Lego, they need a person to put them together. In reality chemicals are not like Lego, needing complex conditions each step to build simple molecules like the Haber process, each step.

No human knows, or will be able to know where consciousness comes from while breathing, that’s common sense. The incredulous say it’s an extension from monkeys.

I hope this helps you to understand God the Creator is the very logical answer, no incredulity no ignorance.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

No human knows, or will be able to know where consciousness comes from while breathing, that’s common sense.

No, it's an unfounded claim, and an embarrassingly foolish one at that.

 

[Apostle John]

No, it's an unfounded claim, and an embarrassingly foolish one at that.

I meant in science and in particular to my next sentence that you edited out - “The incredulous say it’s an extension from monkeys.” As a Christian I do know where consciousness comes from, that is from God. I used to be a foolish atheist.