Learn how to diferenciate between MYTH and LEGEND

[Subduction Zone]

That would only be true if God had planted the Genesis story.

I am unclear here. If Genesis is read literally that is a claim that God is a liar.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That would only be true if God had planted the Genesis story.

Huh? You don't think that human beings can compose myths that teach values? I love the moral lessons from Star Trek -- no need for the stories to be "planted" by God.

 

[shunyadragon]

I do not think this is a fair remark. I think it is actually rather common for people to believe myths. A recent Gallup poll states that 40% of Americans are creationists. I think this sort of thing is especially easy if you have grown up with a literal understanding of Genesis. I can tall you that I was in my mid 20s before I took my watershed course in anthropology and realized that evolution was true, and had a massive realignment of my world view.

You just confirmed the problem of blind belief. self-deceived, is common and a real problem of clinging mindlessly to ancient worldviews justified by the desire of identity and a sense of community. Yes I believe many are lying, especially the well educated who claim to believe, but in relaity do not. The staff of the Discovery Institute and AIG are classic examples of the problem.

An example of lying is the misrepresentation of the Egyptian Amarna letters translations. The text of the letters has been translated very well with several sources, and they still assert that the letters document Joshua's army invading Canaan and attacking and even attacking Egyptian occupied cities.

Actually also widespread dishonest lying and misrepresentation of archaeology.

This problem is a good example of believers giving up their potential free will to be able to honestly decern the evidence of science and archaeology.

The other bottomline I know of no references where atheists consider the believers in myths of the ancient cultures were lying.

 

[shunyadragon]

I am unclear here. If Genesis is read literally that is a claim that God is a liar.

. . . because it is radically in contradiction of the known evidence of science and archaeology if remotely true. It represents the illogical beliefs of some that God Created the evidence to support the scientific view of the nature of our physical existence and the history of humanity,.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You just confirmed the problem of blind belief. self-deceived, is common and a real problem of clinging mindlessly to ancient worldviews justified by the desire of identity and a sense of community. Yes I believe many are lying, especially the well educated who claim to believe, but in relaity do not. The staff of the Discovery Institute and AIG are classic examples of the problem.

An example of lying is the misrepresentation of the Egyptian Amarna letters translations. The text of the letters has been translated very well with several sources, and they still assert that the letters document Joshua's army invading Canaan and attacking and even attacking Egyptian occupied cities.

Actually also widespread dishonest lying and misrepresentation of archaeology.

This problem is a good example of believers giving up their potential free will to be able to honestly decern the evidence of science and archaeology.

The other bottomline I know of no references where atheists consider the believers in myths of the ancient cultures were lying.

Actually, YOU were the one who said they were lying.

Those that believe today that the ancient myths of the Torah and the NT are true are most likely lying or extremely self-deceived.

 

[shunyadragon]

Actually, YOU were the one who said they were lying.

I gave two options. Please read my posts and cite me completely and correctly. I said there were two options. Down right lying as I described which is the rule for the educated goats leading the sheep where ever they go, and of blind believers. self-deceived, is common and a real problem of clinging mindlessly to ancient worldviews justified by the clinging desire of identity and a sense of community.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I gave two options. Please read my posts and cite me completely and correctly. I said there were two options. Down right lying as I described which is the rule for the educated goats leading the sheep where ever they go, and of blind believers. self-deceived, is common and a real problem of clinging mindlessly to ancient worldviews justified by the clinging desire of identity and a sense of community.

I understand that you gave two options. I did not object to your option of "self deception." I took issue with your other option that they were lying. Lying means that there is deliberate deception going on. I think that's a terrible thing for you to say.

 

[shunyadragon]

I understand that you gave two options. I did not object to your option of "self deception." I took issue with your other option that they were lying. Lying means that there is deliberate deception going on. I think that's a terrible thing for you to say.

Yes I believe the educated goats of the Discovery Institute and AIG are lying big time. I will stand by this based on the evidence, They have the education that demonstrates their lies. They can simply read the translations of the Egyptian Amarna letters and know what they really say.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yes I believe the educated goats of the Discovery Institute and AIG are lying big time.

Ridiculous. They may be foolish, but I see no evidence to indicate deliberate deception.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ridiculous. They may be foolish, but I see no evidence to indicate deliberate deception.

Your ignoring the facts of deliberate deception.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ridiculous. They may be foolish, but I see no evidence to indicate deliberate deception.

There is a point in one's education where one cannot both support a literal interpretation of the Bible and be honest about it. The scientists associated with the Discovery Toot are either lying about what they know or lying for that organization in what they write. They are clearly wrong in far too many of their claims.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ridiculous. They may be foolish, but I see no evidence to indicate deliberate deception.

I gave the problem of the Egyption letters and their are many many more I can cite. I am not saying they lie about being devoted Creationist in the literal Biblical sense, but . . .

The following is classic example of a well known Creationist scientist who lied (fraudulent) about scientific data.

Institute for Creation Research: Still fraudulent after all these years

Sometime in the spring I let a long-running discussion with pastor Joe Leavell taper off. I thought I’d be back to it more quickly. It’s that sort of summer. In one of his last posts, J…

timpanogos.blog

I’ll be brief in my response here, at least to start: Same old fraud, not even new wineskins.

Dr. Russell Humphreys, a famous creationism crank (to serious geologists and other scientists), claims that the amount of helium he detected in some zircon crystals was so high that the crystals could not be more than a few thousands of years old, rather than the millions of years old all other dating methods by all other scientists produce. Humphreys’ findings have never been submitted to any science journal for publication, but were instead distributed to donors to a creationist ministry.

Oh, Joe: These guys depend on a lack of normal skepticism and a lack of knowledge to perpetrate these frauds on honest Christians. I do wish more Christians would hold their feet to the fire.

More to follow . . .

 

[shunyadragon]

Huh? You don't think that human beings can compose myths that teach values? I love the moral lessons from Star Trek -- no need for the stories to be "planted" by God.

I believe he is referring to the problem of the claim of the facts of the stories of the mythology of the Pentateuch " if they would be considered true and factual,", and not the possible "moral, ethical, and human nature in relationship to God lessons in the myths.

 

[Truthseeker]

Typically, legends don't get truer over time. On the contrary, legends often begin with a kernel of truth and then are expanded and exagerrated, often to supernatural levels. Other times, legends are made up whole cloth.

It depends on the historian, but some believe that there's a kernal of truth to the Arthur legend, some believe he flat out doesn't exist. So your point is well taken.

 

[Truthseeker]

You can start on this: I never said "a myth is an untrue story", so you can save some time and effort in some kind of strawman you are constructing, maybe?

I had the feeling you weren't saying that but you didn't clearly say that up to then it looked like to me. I don't think you said one way or the other. I suggest you be clearer in what you are saying.

 

[Trailblazer]

I am unclear here. If Genesis is read literally that is a claim that God is a liar.

I am unclear what you are saying. If God did not write Genesis how can God be held accountable for anything that is in it?
Or do you believe that God was responsible for what the writers wrote, that God inspired them?

For the sake of argument let's say that Genesis was inspired by God, so what Genesis says that God said is actually from God....
In that case what did God lie about?

 

[Truthseeker]

I think you might have a small sample of atheists that you're looking at. I'm an atheist, and I think that myths are extremely valuable for their symbolic and cultural content. Myths aren't meant to be taken literally; and they encode deep cultural meaning.

As an atheist, I see value in the Creation myth, and in the myth of Adam and Eve. It doesn't make sense to me to require that myths be historically accurate, "true" or similar; their value is in their meaning.

Is the point of your thread to assert that everything in the Bible is literally true?

I agree with you here, but it doesn't appear to me that he is saying everything in the Bible is literally true. He has not been clear, though.

 

[shunyadragon]

It depends on the historian, but some believe that there's a kernal of truth to the Arthur legend, some believe he flat out doesn't exist. So your point is well taken.

Yes there is likely a kernel of truth in the Arthur Legend, but as time goes on it remains a kernel,

 

[Truthseeker]

I am not interested on your study about "myth"... it's a superfluos content I don't need to prove my initial point. I write in simple words for general public, and I try to make my topics understandable to ordinary people who do not need so much erudition.

Again: re-read my initial post.

It would help to answer that question he asked at the end. It only adds to confusion not to.

 

[Truthseeker]

Yes there is likely a kernel of truth in the Arthur Legend, but as time goes on it remains a kernel, and is the legend of King David yes he was likely a minor tribal leader in early Hebrew history.

I agree that David did not do all that conquering that the Bible claims. No one mentioned David in his lifetime in the history record in surrounding areas.