That those things exist? or that they would be the result of the flood?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is the Bible Allegorical or Literal?
- Thread starter loverofhumanity
- Start date
If you believe so. I don't think that is true, because the theory behind that is not logically sound. It doesn't show any real force that could raise mountains.
Audie
Veteran Member
In America, that is known as “ playing dumb”.
Viker
Your beloved eccentric Auntie Cristal
Audie
Veteran Member
The logic / mechanism is very simple, being convection currents
deep in the earth.
that enormous forces are involved is shown in earthquakes,
which in such as California move an entire region of the state
northward. As plainly seen in fences, highways etc that
don’t line up anymore.
That the Atlantic keeps getting wider is very plainly evident,
tho the abysmally ignorant don’t know that, and won’t study it.
Pushing up a mountain is nothing compared to pushing the
Americas away from Europe and Asia.
I read somewhere that it tales great foolishness to dismiss
what one knows nothing about.
it seems to take that, and unlimited arrogance to believe
one KNOWS what “god” said and did in exact meaning,
AND, knows more than any scientist on earth.
Without ever having to study.
deep in the earth.
that enormous forces are involved is shown in earthquakes,
which in such as California move an entire region of the state
northward. As plainly seen in fences, highways etc that
don’t line up anymore.
That the Atlantic keeps getting wider is very plainly evident,
tho the abysmally ignorant don’t know that, and won’t study it.
Pushing up a mountain is nothing compared to pushing the
Americas away from Europe and Asia.
I read somewhere that it tales great foolishness to dismiss
what one knows nothing about.
it seems to take that, and unlimited arrogance to believe
one KNOWS what “god” said and did in exact meaning,
AND, knows more than any scientist on earth.
Without ever having to study.
I'd like to repeat what I frequently post when I see this word. Allegory is a specific literary form, one where an author substitutes imagined persons, places, and events 1:1 for known persons, places, or events from history, often of a political nature. If a piece of writing doesn't do that, it shouldn't be called allegory. A smaller version of such substitution is the metaphor - a single substitution, such as "the apple of his eye" rather than a story.
Gulliver's Travels is a political allegory in which fantastical fictional characters substitute for prominent historical figures like Walpole in the British politics of Swift's era, symbolized by the rope dancer Flimnap. We know what these things stand for, and they are specific, not place-holders for what was still not known such as the natural history of the universe.
These stories are simply guesses, and erroneous ones if one accepts the scientific narrative. But what believer wants to call his sacred texts wrong guesses? Symbol, metaphor, and allegory all sound better. The Mesopotamians and Vikings also guessed wrong, but we don't mind calling them wrong guesses, or myths, and we don't view them as being "deeply symbolic," nor call them allegories, which require specific referents as outlined. They're also just wrong guesses.
Do you disagree?
The continents are fragmented now, so why no flood? And I get the sense that you conceive of continents as slabs of granite floating on oceans of water beneath them. They ride on tectonic plates that float on magma, and though there may be water trapped within them including hydrated minerals, it is not water that can escape to cover them.
Have you tried sinking oil and gas in water?
You may have seen my comment elsewhere that this is probably why we have a flood story that depicts the deity so unfavorably. What does it explain? The Garden myth explains why man lives a harsh, difficult life and then dies rather than living in a paradise. He's a sinner and needs punishment. He dared be human and express free will. The Tower of Babbel stories explains why God gave man so many languages, an obvious disadvantage. Guess why? Sin again. He tried to construct something. More punishment needed. And the story of Sodom and Gomorrah probably resulted from a meteoric impact: Fire and brimstone: Sodom and Gomorrah perhaps destroyed by 'cosmic fireball,' evidence shows Guess why? Sin again and punishment again. But what about the flood? Why depict a god that fails as a creator, blames its creation, and punishes it and virtually all other terrestrial life with a cruel mass drowning rather than just reengineer man properly or learn a little tolerance and even appreciation for imperfection: Wabi-sabi - Wikipedia There must be a reason, and I can find no other than these marine fossils.
Orogeny defeats your premise of a great flood being necessary to submerge all land.
You're suggesting that heavy rain and flooding leads to glaciation? That's incorrect. Glaciers come from snowfall and its accumulation. Water finds aquifers and rivers
The evidence is available to you if you ever want to look at it and consider it critically, but it requires a degree of preparation, however, to understand. We aren't born able to do that. It's an acquired skill, borne of thousands of hours of training and instruction.
You haven't demonstrated proficiency in making such judgments, which undermines them. The force that raises mountains is the same one that causes most earthquakes. The Himalayas are rising today.
Man's technology? Compared to what is considered extraterrestrials - the things they do and if they don't want to be seen or recorded they won't be. The best pictures are the old ones.https://www.history.com/news/world-war-iis-bizarre-battle-of-los-angeles
Mystery continues on 25th anniversary of Phoenix Lights; Harkins hosting special event
A puzzle in the sky that many say is still unsolved. Sunday, March 13 marks the 25th anniversary of the mass sighting of the Phoenix Lights.
In 1952, 'Flying Saucers' Over Washington Sent the Press Into a Frenzy | HISTORY
UFO reports in the capital's air space set headlines blaring across the nation about 'disks' and 'whatzits' and mysterious lights.
www.history.com
UFO Watch: 8 Times the Government Looked for Flying Saucers
A secret Pentagon UFO program is only the most recent in decades of work by the U.S. government looking into the unexplained. Here’s a look back at UFO investigations of the past.
I, may relate to people saying they cite these things but I never post their photos the older photos look more genuine yet also not sharply clear.
UFOs or no, 'Battle of Los Angeles' nears 75th anniversary
Why would anti-aircraft gunners fire 1,400 rounds into the sky over Los Angeles? A museum director has sought answers. He hasn't found aliens.
Mystery continues on 25th anniversary of Phoenix Lights; Harkins hosting special event
A puzzle in the sky that many say is still unsolved. Sunday, March 13 marks the 25th anniversary of the mass sighting of the Phoenix Lights.
In 1952, 'Flying Saucers' Over Washington Sent the Press Into a Frenzy | HISTORY
UFO reports in the capital's air space set headlines blaring across the nation about 'disks' and 'whatzits' and mysterious lights.
www.history.com
Seems they've taken the old pictures off the internet and a few were clear.
Because the sunken material has been compressed more after the flood, which has caused the ocean floor to go down, making the illusion that mountains rise.
During the flood, it was not yet oil and gas. The flood buried stuff and mixed it with sediments. And in high pressure it has turned to oil, gas and coal. And at the same time it has been compressed more, which then has also caused the water level go down.
Fails? If God's goal was to make free people, He has not failed, even if some people are evil and will die because of that.
Not really.
Heavy rain and clouds cooled the climate, which led to ice-age and glaciation.
How do you know? More probably water level is going down near it, which makes it look like mountain rising. It depends on what you set as the fixed point.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Buoyancy. That's what does it. Buoyancy does exert real forces, or ships and rubber ducks would not float.
And of course it is "logically sound". Do you really think all the word's geophysicists are idiots? How likely is that? Or, do you think they are engaged in some grand atheist conspiracy? How likely is that?
And it would make the Jews / Israelites out to be liars….that, along with their Passover (based as it is on their *exodus* from Egypt), and all the prophecies in their history, claimed by secularists to be written “after the fact.”
That’s a lot of lying!!
But that raises the questions: how could these writings, accused of being fake prophecies, have ever gained such traction, ie., popularity? Especially with the surrounding nations being mostly enemies of Israel? These ancient nations would have written their own documents, decrying Israel’s hypocrisy!
We don’t find any ancient documents from objective sources doing such a thing.
Last edited:
Brian2
Veteran Member
Mountain ranges are getting higher these days at steady rates per year.
Audie
Veteran Member
Creationixrs really do think
ttey know more than any scientist on earth.
Audie
Veteran Member
Traction...
So by that the Koran and book of Mormon
are comparably true and reliable.
What sunken material is that, and how does it prevent the process you described - the continents are cracked apart leading to water rising up and flooding the earth - from happening now? The continents are still separated. And how does one push the sea floor down with detritus falling onto it? It's already supporting the weight of the oceans. You've still got the problem of finding about 4,500,000,000 km3 of water that must be added to the earth to cover Everest, getting it to the surface, and then removing it from view back into the earth again.
And I'm pretty sure that if the submarine base of a mountain sunk, the altitude of its peak would decline. You seem to be imagining that the sea level would fall without the mountain falling with it, exposing more mountain.
Going by the flood story and the multiple myths that conclude with man being punished for sin (garden, tower of Babbel, flood, and Sodom), it seems that God's goal was to create sinless people given how he can't abide their presence around him, damns them for sin, and destroyed most of the human race in a flood because of it. I'd say that act was an admission of failure by the deity's own standards. Worse, the deity failed again by replenishing the earth using the same sinful breeding stock.
Or perhaps you believe that this was all God's wanted out us, that we have free even at the cost of damnation for exercising it. Not a very good plan from man's perspective.
That the Himalayas are rising? The altitude of the highest peaks is increasing by about 2 cm/yr. You can do a little investigating yourself:
How do they measure the height of a mountain?
Answer (1 of 31): There are several ways to measure the height of a mountain, and the method used can depend on the specific mountain and the purpose of the measurement. Some common methods include: 1. Surveying: This method involves using survey instruments such as a theodolite or a total stati...
Audie
Veteran Member
That whole fantasy about flood and mountains is just too silly and childish for me to tackle.What sunken material is that, and how does it prevent the process you described - the continents are cracked apart leading to water rising up and flooding the earth - from happening now? The continents are still separated. And how does one push the sea floor down with detritus falling onto it? It's already supporting the weight of the oceans. You've still got the problem of finding about 4,500,000,000 km3 of water that must be added to the earth to cover Everest, getting it to the surface, and then removing it from view back into the earth again.
And I'm pretty sure that if the submarine base of a mountain sunk, the altitude of its peak would decline. You seem to be imagining that the sea level would fall without the mountain falling with it, exposing more mountain.
Going by the flood story and the multiple myths that conclude with man being punished for sin (garden, tower of Babbel, flood, and Sodom), it seems that God's goal was to create sinless people given how he can't abide their presence around him, damns them for sin, and destroyed most of the human race in a flood because of it. I'd say that act was an admission of failure by the deity's own standards. Worse, the deity failed again by replenishing the earth using the same sinful breeding stock.
Or perhaps you believe that this was all God's wanted out us, that we have free even at the cost of damnation for exercising it. Not a very good plan from man's perspective.
That the Himalayas are rising? The altitude of the highest peaks is increasing by about 2 cm/yr. You can do a little investigating yourself:How do they measure the height of a mountain?
Answer (1 of 31): There are several ways to measure the height of a mountain, and the method used can depend on the specific mountain and the purpose of the measurement. Some common methods include: 1. Surveying: This method involves using survey instruments such as a theodolite or a total stati...www.quora.com
The only part of mild unterest is that anyone could make up such transparently ridiculous stuff
and present it to view.
Somehow convinced the while that their idess, and comprehension of physics/ geology is not merely up to the task, but that a few minutes of their casually applied time is far superior to the combined work of every scientist on earth.
Coz what, they put in even less effort than he?
in- don't know squat but that's enough to
be the greatest scientist on earth.
Last edited:
Those texts haven’t received anywhere near the ostracism the Bible has generated… and today it’s a top seller. And published in the most languages — more than any other book…
Manuscripts that were transmitted onto perishable materials, like vellum, papyrus, etc., copies after copies after copies after copies beginning over 3500 years ago, and it still is mostly word-for-word — very few discrepancies — from their origin til now (read Dead Sea Scrolls), all this is evidence we’d expect to see from a divinely inspired book.
Last edited:
That’s a necessary question, isn’t it?!!
I think part of that answer can be found in Jesus’ words at Luke 10:21, where Jesus said it’s his “Father” , ie., Jehovah in English aka Yahweh in Hebrew, who reveals truth…. or hides it. (Notice, it’s not Jesus.)
So, wouldn’t a person need His (Jesus’ Father’s) blessing to gain an accurate understanding of it?
And didn’t Yahweh call Himself a jealous God, at Exodus 20:1-6?
IOW, that would preclude worship of any other god….making anything else a god.
So it seems to me, that if a person wants to gain accurate knowledge of the Bible, they must find the group that follows Yahweh‘s requirements for worship. Those requirements used to include sacrifices at the Tabernacle, then the Temples….now it includes exercising faith in only Jesus’ sacrifice. John 14:6, “No one goes to the Father except through me.”
Last edited:
It is just illogical. Oceanic crust is allegedly 3 mi thick, and continental crust 20 mil. To them "float" on same level on a surface would mean continental rock is over 6 times denser. The density of continental rock is about 2500 kg/m3. So, oceanic rock should be over 15000 kg/m3 (more than lead). Is there some way to measure that?
But, how could it be, wouldn't the extra weight of a mountain compress the crust below it so that the crust would be actually denser below mountain than below an ocean?
Sorry, I think it is just not believable to think that 3 mi crust is heavier or as heavy as 20 or even 30 mi of crust.
"The crust of Earth is of two distinct types:
- Oceanic: 5 km (3 mi) to 10 km (6 mi) thick[4] and composed primarily of denser, more mafic rocks, such as basalt, diabase, and gabbro.
- Continental: 30 km (20 mi) to 50 km (30 mi) thick and mostly composed of less dense, more felsic rocks, such as granite. In a few places, such as the Tibetan Plateau, the Altiplano, and the eastern Baltic Shield, the continental crust is thicker (50 km (30 mi) to 80 km (50 mi))."
Earth's crust - Wikipedia
I think the modern plate tectonic theory is idiotic, but it does not necessary mean that all geophysicists are also.
Why do you believe that? What if the reference point is moving and mountain remains the same? How could you know?
No water needs to be added. When the flood happened, water had not compressed material below the water yet, that is why this amount of water was enough to cover everything. After the flood, water that weights a lot, has compressed material below it, which is why ocean floors have gone down, causing the illusion that mountains rise. And material below the water has been compressed means, air has escaped causing the material to be in more compact form.
By what the Bible tells, God wanted to have free individuals. And second plan is that He wants to give eternal life for those who become righteous. Others will have only limited time.
Why do you believe it is rising and not that the reference point is going down?That the Himalayas are rising? The altitude of the highest peaks is increasing by about 2 cm/yr. You can do a little investigating yourself:How do they measure the height of a mountain?
Answer (1 of 31): There are several ways to measure the height of a mountain, and the method used can depend on the specific mountain and the purpose of the measurement. Some common methods include: 1. Surveying: This method involves using survey instruments such as a theodolite or a total stati...