Talking Snakes, Donkeys and Bushes

[Subduction Zone]

My Soul.

Not very reliable. A reliable source gives the same answer regardless of who finds or presents the evidence.

 

[allfoak]

Not very reliable. A reliable source gives the same answer regardless of who finds or presents the evidence.

That's pretty funny.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's pretty funny.

How so? You soul will give a different answer than the soul of a Hindu or Muslim.

 

[allfoak]

How so? You soul will give a different answer than the soul of a Hindu or Muslim.

Not true.
Our Soul is eternal and intimately connected to its source, as are we intimately connected to our Soul.
Our Soul is the only reliable source there is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not true.
Our Soul is eternal and intimately connected to its source, as are we intimately connected to our Soul.
Our Soul is the only reliable source there is.

Your soul is probably just a figment of your imagination.

 

[allfoak]

Your soul is probably just a figment of your imagination.

And I suppose the being of light that people that have had a Near Death Experience
encounter is a figment of their imagination as well.
Imagination by the way is one of the most important aspects of who we are.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And I suppose the being of light that people that have had a Near Death Experience
encounter is a figment of their imagination as well.
Imagination by the way is one of the most important aspects of who we are.

There are multiple "beings" seen during NDE's. They tend to match the person's personal religious beliefs. That indicates that they are figments of their imaginations.

 

[allfoak]

There are multiple "beings" seen during NDE's. They tend to match the person's personal religious beliefs. That indicates that they are figments of their imaginations.

The imagination is what creates , sustains and makes dreams come true.
It is through the use of imagination that all things happen.
Something must be imagined before it can happen.
A figment is just a thought.
People say thoughts have no substance.
I beg to differ.

 

[sojourner]

None of the Bible should be taken literally.
The history is a cloak used to hide what can be found by turning what is written within.
The history is full of holes because it was never meant to be accurate.
The contradictions and absurdities are there in order to get people to look deeper for meaning that can be found behind the historical account.

I disagree. Some of it is literalistic. The contradictions are there mostly as a result of different theological threads being drawn together.

 

[sojourner]

Your soul is probably just a figment of your imagination.

Imagination is a strong director of energy.

 

[Earthling]

I disagree. Some of it is literalistic. The contradictions are there mostly as a result of different theological threads being drawn together.

Later, like in seminary school.

 

[sojourner]

Later, like in seminary school.

Seminary: that island of scholastic enlightenment in a sea of righteous ignorance.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Now, everyone who has read the Genesis account knows that the text, if taken literally at face value, would read that the serpent in the garden of Eden who deceived Eve was talking. But, at the same time we all know that not to be the case. Atheists seem to have a difficult time with distinguishing the difference between the literal and the figurative. I personally think this is a mock stupidity in order to make a point, for example, saying that the Bible has talking snakes when it is abundantly clear, even to a simple child, that it was Satan, not the literal serpent, that was speaking to Eve. The account is given in her perspective so the snake seems to be talking.

Eve wasn't deceived. The serpent revealed the real reason God didn't want them to eat the fruit.

Satan isn't in that story.

Yet the Bible clearly says that Balaam's Donkey spoke. It may have had assistance, but if you read the story it does say that the donkey spoke, not that Balaam thought that he heard the donkey talk.

The donkey had been talking the entire time. Balaam didn't speak donkey. Thus, God gave the donkey the ability to speak Balaam's language.

So the implication is that they got possessed or something and then started talking? Even without adequate vocal cords to make a coherent sentence?

Maybe they had an infusion of ALZ-112 from here.

I really liked the detail in the newest movies that they don't start talking until their bodies have changed to a more human appearance/posture.

How did you come to the erroneous conclusion that Genesis was a work of fiction?

Because it can hardly be traced to before the monarchy or the judges, is filled with silly things like anachronisms and historical fantasies, and is written to comment on competing religions.

I consider it no different than letting white supremacists write elementary school textbooks where Europeans moved in after the Natives graciously just moved away and let them have their land and belongings or that Africans were migrant workers.

There were only two humans so it wouldn't have been wise to appear as human. It wouldn't have been wise for him to appear as a spirit being, or so called angel since Adam and Eve had been in contact with Michael already.

Michael's the only angel around? Isn't there an entire heavenly host? He can't just pose as Random Redshirt Angel # 45?

You could say de-evolved since serpents can't actually speak.

People without brains do an awful lot of talking.

There is not one shred of evidence that anyone other than Moses wrote the books of the Bible that he was attributed to for thousands of years.

There's the fact there is no historical evidence of Moses, for starters.

2) he was literate and was able to write, if he did exist.

And even if he did exist, per the story, he was raised Egyptian, so he wouldn't be writing in a language foreign to him, would he?

What reliable source are you speaking from?

What happens if the reply is "God"? If God tells you the bible is false, where do your loyalties REALLY lie?

 

[shunyadragon]

Wow. Only scientists have evidence... Does that make sense to you?

Science does not have evidence. The objective verifiable evidence is in the nature around us. As far as I know science is the only reliable source for understanding the physical nature of our existence, but that is the limit of science.

 

[sojourner]

I personally think this is a mock stupidity in order to make a point, for example, saying that the Bible has talking snakes when it is abundantly clear, even to a simple child, that it was Satan, not the literal serpent, that was speaking to Eve. The account is given in her perspective so the snake seems to be talking

That’s incorrect, and it blows your “theory.” The account isn’t written from Eve’s perspective. The account is rendered from the Narrator’s POV. And, in ALL literary examples of narration, the Narrator knows everything in the world of the story. The serpent (whom the Narrator does not refer to as “Satan”) talks. Because the Narrator says.

 

[Muffled]

Then you are demonstrably wrong. It is easy to show that there was no flood. All of the evidence out there tells us that there was no flood. To claim that there was a worldwide flood is to call your God a liar. Why would you do that?

I believe I never said there was a world wide flood. That is a misinterpretation.

 

[Muffled]

People once commonly believed that the sun revolved around the earth and black people were cursed to be servants of white people.

They usually supported their beliefs by quoting Genesis. I came to the belief that the Bible has almost nothing to do with God. Except in the sense of people creating God in their own image for their own purposes.
Tom

I believe that is illogical. The idea that people created God can't proceed from the fact that people misinterpret scripture.

 

[Muffled]

The Bible is full of failed prophesies. Does that not mean that the Bible refutes itself?

I believe the Bible is not full of failed prophecies. The world is full of people who don't understand prophecy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe I never said there was a world wide flood. That is a misinterpretation.

What version do you believe in and why?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe the Bible is not full of failed prophecies. The world is full of people who don't understand prophecy.

I understand prophecy fine. I have found that those that cannot admit when a prophecy fails to be unable to understand prophecy.