THEIST UNITY(Ed.)

[Dr.Who]

The vast majority of Christianity does not take the bible literally.

We would be hard pressed to find even a single Christian who when prompted would say that the bible is either 100% literal or 100% figurative.

When it says that Jesus is a door they pretty much know that is figurative. When it says that Jesus was walking they pretty much know that that is literal.

There are a bunch of other statements that are harder to know if they were meant to be figurative or literal. It is the stand on these that passages that define a person as one takes it literal or figurative. But every person no doubt has a different list of which passages they put into which category.

 

[dahermit]

As a spirit God the Father would not have any of these. Neither would the Holy Spirit. But Jesus did.

Re: Penis, hands with opposing thumbs. Man being made in the image of God first appears in Genisus...which was before there was a Jesus. But your dodge was insipid anyway.

 

[BigRob]

Re: Penis, hands with opposing thumbs. Man being made in the image of God first appears in Genisus...which was before there was a Jesus. But your dodge was insipid anyway.

Genesis is based on Jewish traditions and had its own point to the audience that it was written for. Actually in Genesis itself, there are two creation stories... so which is it? Or could it simply be that it is there to send a message and not be taken as literal truth?

 

[Dr.Who]

Genesis is based on Jewish traditions and had its own point to the audience that it was written for. Actually in Genesis itself, there are two creation stories... so which is it? Or could it simply be that it is there to send a message and not be taken as literal truth?

Both genesis stories describe the same thing in perfect unity unless one wants to see disharmony.

 

[BigRob]

Both genesis stories describe the same thing in perfect unity unless one wants to see disharmony.

I personally think the vast majority of the Old Testament is metaphors and was written for particular audiences in a particular context.

 

[Dr.Who]

Re: Penis, hands with opposing thumbs. Man being made in the image of God first appears in Genisus...which was before there was a Jesus. But your dodge was insipid anyway.

The NT says thata Jesus was around at the beginning when the universe was formed. The OT is not as manifest in that statement but also says that the Christ was around before creation.

And how is it a dodge to say that God is a spirit and does not have physical form? When the OT talks about man being made in the image of God it is not talking about the physical image of God.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

I thought Jesus was born after god had a bit of horizontal hockey with Mary. Approximately 2008 years ago. You know, that BC and AD stuff? Celebrating Jesus' birthday at xmas etc

Do you think god has a big penis?

How anyone can believe any of this **** beggars belief.

If adults went round behaving as though they passionately believe in father xmas we would rightly think them mad.

 

[Dr.Who]

I thought Jesus was born after god had a bit of horizontal hockey with Mary. Approximately 2008 years ago. You know, that BC and AD stuff? Celebrating Jesus' birthday at xmas etc

Jesus was with God as a Spirtual being just as God is a spirit before the Universe was created. The very first paragraph of the Gospel of John says this. If you knew enough about Christianity to have any credibility as a critic you would know this.

"1(A)In the beginning was (B)the Word, and the Word was (C)with God, and (D)the Word was God.

2He was in the beginning with God.

3(E)All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

4(F)In Him was life, and the life was (G)the Light of men.

5(H)The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not [a]comprehend it."

Do you think god has a big penis?

God the father - Spirits don't have them.
Holy Spirit - Spirits don't have them.
Jesus the man - irrelevant except to demonstrate that you are immature.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

I'm really sorry but that all sounds very odd.

BTW I have read the bible from cover to cover twice.

I have read lots of other works of fiction too but I don't go round citing arcane passages with my spin on them as rock solid proof of something that beggars belief.

I think you might want to consider the view that because it says someething in the bible it doesn't make it tue.

Even most people in the church accept that. And when you start saying (because science has debunked so much of it) that it is allegorical or open to some kind of interpretation who is to say which interpretation works?

And if it is the word of god why didn't he get it right and just state the truth rather than making it so hard for his poor followers?

And why is it taken as being gospel until science debunks it and then it is allegorical?

You christians should enter the next olymnpics in the wriggling competiton.

You'd be gold medalists

 

[GenSeneca]

I'm really sorry but that all sounds very odd.

BTW I have read the bible from cover to cover twice.

I have read lots of other works of fiction too but I don't go round citing arcane passages with my spin on them as rock solid proof of something that beggars belief.

I think you might want to consider the view that because it says someething in the bible it doesn't make it tue.

Even most people in the church accept that. And when you start saying (because science has debunked so much of it) that it is allegorical or open to some kind of interpretation who is to say which interpretation works?

And if it is the word of god why didn't he get it right and just state the truth rather than making it so hard for his poor followers?

And why is it taken as being gospel until science debunks it and then it is allegorical?

You christians should enter the next olymnpics in the wriggling competiton.

You'd be gold medalists

That was really funny.

have you ever thought about writing comedy?

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

It is a shame that having run out of arguments you can't just consider the possibility that I am right.

Mind you the childishness displayed in these answers does kind of position a lot of your posts more clearly.

 

[GenSeneca]

It is a shame that having run out of arguments you can't just consider the possibility that I am right.

Mind you the childishjness displayed in these answers does kind of position a lot of your posts more clearly.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Keep em coming.

You look good

 

[GenSeneca]

Keep em coming.

You look good

Dawkinsrocks has no clothes!!!

 

[dahermit]

And how is it a dodge to say that God is a spirit and does not have physical form? When the OT talks about man being made in the image of God it is not talking about the physical image of God.

If it is not talking about man being made in the physical image of God, it becomes a ambiguous, nebulous statement that would have little meaning to a person living in those times(or for most now). But, the believers, in light of the fact that the statement is ridiculous ("...man being made in the physical image of God..."), come up with some "dodge" like: Man is made in the spiritual image of God(Just what that means is beyond my 138 I.Q. and by definition, beyond most of the people in the world). Seems like if the Bible were the unerring inspired work of God, it would say what it meant instead of a collection of statements that were inexact enough to be bent to any and all reason or opinion.
Or, are you saying that the Bible is not the unerring inspired word of God?