None of it is true - Does this bother anyone?

[logician]

"There are some people who take it literally, but not most."

I would say this is most certainly not true. Even the bible tries to trace a real lineage back to Adam. YOu must not have been to very many Sunday school classes.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

"There are some people who take it literally, but not most."

I would say this is most certainly not true. Even the bible tries to trace a real lineage back to Adam. YOu must not have been to very many Sunday school classes.

Spoken like someone who has.

The ignorers and apologists around here like to pretend there is a more sophisticated more modern more intellectual understanding of the WOG.

Real xantians know better.

God says what he means and means what he says.

 

[slave2six]

You've never heard of metaphor?

The problem with this story being a metaphor is that the entire Law, rules for sacrifice, and the entire story of God sending his Son to die so that we can be reconciled to God are in fact meaningless.

If the truth is that mankind evolved and that we simply behave in ways that are consistent with our evolutionary past, there is no "free will that resulted in man being separated from God." And so the entire religion is built on a lie and therefore cannot and should not stand.

 

[Storm]

Not really.

 

[blackout]

None of it is true - Does this bother anyone?

.......
No, not in the slightest.

He stole my answer! :149:

 

[Riverwolf]

The problem with this story being a metaphor is that the entire Law, rules for sacrifice, and the entire story of God sending his Son to die so that we can be reconciled to God are in fact meaningless.

If the truth is that mankind evolved and that we simply behave in ways that are consistent with our evolutionary past, there is no "free will that resulted in man being separated from God." And so the entire religion is built on a lie and therefore cannot and should not stand.

Uh, dude...

The Bible isn't a single book written by a single person; the OT is a small library of Jewish literature, and the NT is a small collection of Christian writings, dominated by the letters of a single person, Paul, to various Mediterranean churches.

I'm afraid you're reading the Bible in the same way that many evangelical and fundamentalist Christians read the Bible: as a single massive work. While I would hardly say that's a "wrong" way to read it, it's not a good way for the non-believer to read it.

The Adam and Eve story is completely separate from the rest of the Bible; it's in fact separate from the first chapter of Genesis!

Now, I'll tell you what the story could be a metaphor for: the "fall" from a hunter-gatherer society to a farming society. Before the "fall," life was relatively simple. Afterwards, life was much more complicated and even more difficult. This is an interpretation of some scholars that I've read. (I can't remember where.)

The story could also be a metaphor for puberty. It is a fact that girls mature faster than boys; Eve (then simply called Woman) ate the fruit of the knowledge of good and bad first. In (young) childhood, we feel no embarrassment over nakedness.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You see - when it comes to faith, the veracity of an event doesn't really matter.

You do a marvelous job pummeling your dismissive caricatures with underwhelming certitude.

 

[rojse]

Uh...

the story of Adam and Eve is in the Qur'an.

Remember from the other thread that Alla Prima knows nothing about Islam, nor has any desire to learn about it.

 

[Riverwolf]

Remember from the other thread that Alla Prima knows nothing about Islam, nor has any desire to learn about it.

Point taken.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

You do a marvelous job pummeling your dismissive caricatures with underwhelming certitude.

Wow, a completely meaningless response. How incredibly shocking. No really - I can't believe it. It's just so unexpected coming from you. Really.

 

[sojourner]

The Creation story puts Adam and Eve at anywhere from 6,000 to 10,000 years ago (particularly when we take into account the details about Adam's age and the age of those after him).

All of the scientific evidence points to the conclusion that homo sapiens have been around for some 200,000 years, this in stark contrast to the Garden of Eden story. Indeed, all the physical evidence supports evolution on every level whether biological, geological, or astronomical. The only rational conclusion is that the Adam and Eve story is, well, a story.

And this is the first problem: If it is just a story then there never was a singular event called "the fall of man" and therefore all this business of killing bulls or a virgin human sacrifice on a cross is entirely baseless.

The second problem is this: If we assume that the Garden/fall of man story is true, the conclusion that we draw is that the God of the Bible is not, in fact, very good at all. There is not one human being who would kick his/her toddler child out of the house for disobeying them (certainly not on a first offense!) or (if they had the power) alter that child's core being so that every one of her descendants would be born "in sin" and under a curse. This would be akin to a prisoner conceiving a child during a conjugal visit and then the powers that be taking steps to ensure that the child was raised in prison since the parent had committed an offense.

Moreover, the very nature of forgiveness is such that it does not require sacrifice. If your child steals from you, you don't tell them that they have to sacrifice Rover before they can be at peace with you. And if your neighbor offends you, you do not reconcile to them by allowing them to kill your infant son. Either you forgive or you don't.

The entire thing is not only irrational but if any one of us behaved in a similar fashion, we'd be imprisoned. And rightly so.

Therefore, on the one hand the physical universe screams that the Bible story is not true and on the other hand everything that we understand about the words "good" and "loving" scream that the Bible story cannot be the story of a loving God. How then can anyone actually believe this stuff?

None of it is factual. But to say that none of it is true is to miss the point. No, it doesn't bother me.

 

[rojse]

Wow, a completely meaningless response. How incredibly shocking. No really - I can't believe it. It's just so unexpected coming from you. Really.

Wow, someone else doesn't appreciate Jayhawker Soule's response.

You originally said:

You see - when it comes to faith, the veracity of an event doesn't really matter.

Jayhawker Soule replied:

You do a marvelous job pummeling your dismissive caricatures with underwhelming certitude.

Do you think that the idea that "the veracity of an [faith-based] event doesn't really matter" to all theists, might be an overly broad generalisation, that you have unfairly applied to all theists?

 

[slave2six]

This again? I think there have been about 100 threads talking about Adam and Eve. Most of us believe that the Creation Story- Adam and Eve and the rest is symbolic. There are some people who take it literally, but not most. And sacrifice in the Bible appeared to be a feast- The people did eat the lambs and bulls they sacrificed.

That seems a bit of an obtuse observation. Have you ever read the text? The entire ritual of sacrifice was not a family BBQ, It was deeply held that this was a means of pleasing God and in the Christian story the sacrifice is the only means of "reconciling" to God. Indeed, without the sacrifice, there is absolutely no point in the religion. And if the basis of having sacrifices that reconcile mankind to God are based on a myth or a story, what the heck are all these cathedrals and churches about? Why do people weep over "accepting Christ" and taking the blood of atonement as a means of purifying themselves when it's all rot and nonsense?

 

[slave2six]

the very nature of forgiveness is such that it does not require sacrifice

Moreover,. Neither is sacrifice required anymore - after Jesus Christ was sacrificed for that particular purpose - so that our sins might be forgiven.

Do you realize how stupid this statement is? "Jesus was sacrificed" in order to accomplish forgiveness which by its very nature does not require sacrifice?

Look, if your child "sinned" against you and came to you to ask forgiveness, would you require some kind of a sacrifice? Apparently the father in the Prodigal Son story didn't. So if human beings can forgive without killing people or animals, how the heck are you going to denigrate God by saying that He is so pithy that he does require a sacrifice. I thought God is supposed to be better than us.

In all honesty, if you really believe in the Christian God, you should require that anyone who offends you first has to become a Christian and be covered by the blood of Christ before you can even consider being at peace with them.

 

[slave2six]

Originally Posted by slave2six
The Creation story puts Adam and Eve at anywhere from 6,000 to 10,000 years ago (particularly when we take into account the details about Adam's age and the age of those after him).

If you go by some interpretations.

There can be no question about it, particularly considering that the Book says that Adam lived to be 130 and gave a genealogy of mankind all the way up to Moses.

Originally Posted by slave2six - If it is just a story then there never was a singular event called "the fall of man" and therefore all this business of killing bulls or a virgin human sacrifice on a cross is entirely baseless.

No. sacrifices were indeed preformed long ago. It wasn't baseless to them.

This and the remainder of your responses simply amplify the fact that the Pentateuch could not have been a matter of divine revelation of any kind and therefore, once again, all of current Judaism, Christianity and Islam is as ridiculous as starting a cult based on the Lord of the Rings.

 

[slave2six]

A question..is this thread really pointed to muslims as well ?

Islam isn't even worth discussing. It is less enlightened than the ancient Egyptians and no one here is about to stand up and defend Osiris.

If the basis of Judaism and Christianity is false then it naturally follows that the basis of Islam is also false since they are one and the same thing. And, honestly, why would any rational person want to be affiliated with a religion that was the result of fifty deaths all because of a stupid cartoon or that actively seeks to kill other human beings who simply disagree with it? The actions of those within all of these faiths is reactionary and fearful when any reasoned (or unreasoned) opposition presents itself. This, to me, is the essence of ignorance. No one who is sure of themselves can feel threatened when someone disagrees with them. I mean, seriously, if you came to me and tried to convince me that I am gay when in fact I am not, I'll merely going to look at you like your an idiot and move on. I'm not going to try to beat you up or kill you. I know the truth. The very fact that Islam is so reactionary is evidence that it is not so certain that is has the truth.

And it seems rather insipid and quite insane to me that Islam which sees Moses and Christ as prophets nevertheless seeks to destroy Israel.

Again, it's hardly worth discussing.

 

[slave2six]

Spoken like someone who has.

The ignorers and apologists around here like to pretend there is a more sophisticated more modern more intellectual understanding of the WOG.

Real xantians know better.

God says what he means and means what he says.

Really? Then when he says in Genesis that he created the Earth and vegetation and whatnot before he created the sun, moon and the stars, you believe that? And you believe that he really really loves us and wants to be reconciled to us but that he just can't do it without a bloody sacrifice?

That's amazing.

 

[challupa]

Really? Then when he says in Genesis that he created the Earth and vegetation and whatnot before he created the sun, moon and the stars, you believe that? And you believe that he really really loves us and wants to be reconciled to us but that he just can't do it without a bloody sacrifice?

That's amazing.

He's joking?!!! He's an athiest

 

[challupa]

Islam isn't even worth discussing. It is less enlightened than the ancient Egyptians and no one here is about to stand up and defend Osiris.

If the basis of Judaism and Christianity is false then it naturally follows that the basis of Islam is also false since they are one and the same thing. And, honestly, why would any rational person want to be affiliated with a religion that was the result of fifty deaths all because of a stupid cartoon or that actively seeks to kill other human beings who simply disagree with it? The actions of those within all of these faiths is reactionary and fearful when any reasoned (or unreasoned) opposition presents itself. This, to me, is the essence of ignorance. No one who is sure of themselves can feel threatened when someone disagrees with them. I mean, seriously, if you came to me and tried to convince me that I am gay when in fact I am not, I'll merely going to look at you like your an idiot and move on. I'm not going to try to beat you up or kill you. I know the truth. The very fact that Islam is so reactionary is evidence that it is not so certain that is has the truth.

And it seems rather insipid and quite insane to me that Islam which sees Moses and Christ as prophets nevertheless seeks to destroy Israel.

Again, it's hardly worth discussing.

Actually the ancient Egyptians had a pretty interesting religion. In many ways the Hebrew people stole alot of the Egyptians beliefs and added a little of their own and viola! Islam and Christianity are just new add-ons of ancient religions.

 

[Riverwolf]

There can be no question about it, particularly considering that the Book says that Adam lived to be 130 and gave a genealogy of mankind all the way up to Moses.

No... according to the text, Adam lived to be 930. But that section of Genesis was written by a different person than the person who wrote the story of the Garden.

This and the remainder of your responses simply amplify the fact that the Pentateuch could not have been a matter of divine revelation of any kind and therefore, once again, all of current Judaism, Christianity and Islam is as ridiculous as starting a cult based on the Lord of the Rings.

Except that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam don't necessarily hinge on the mythology. It's in the TEACHINGS WITHIN THE STORY not the story itself that makes the religions.

Yes, starting a cult which says that the Silmarillion is a divine revelation as to what really happened long ago would be silly. But starting one that takes to heart what Tolkien believed and conveyed through his stories is hardly a bad thing.