Why are literalists literalists?

Yes it matters, it matters tremendously, and only one of the ways it matters is that you can't have eternal truths that are presented falsely. Beyond that it matters because the literal truth of Genesis is what holds the rest of the Bible together, a whole much bigger than its parts.But since you say you didn't want to get into this, we don't have to.

Does the fact that Jesus told the story of "The Good Samaritan" or "The Prodigal Son" by way of a parable in any way minimize the message that He had for them and us?

so is the story of how the earth was created by odin, so was the creation of the earth by eriki and EL, infact very much so like how genesis is written
what about the story of the striped animals, or samson are those history?
i've read flood stories that read just like genesis and seem more realisicwhat about gilgimesh?
all of those are all real to the authors and the people who were of the religion or people they were written for
if the bible is history then so are all of those, if you define things as being true because people believed them
this means albino alagators live in the sewers of new york, lots of people believe this, as well as people dying from drinking pop rocks and coke!
based on how you believe things you have a double standard, you believe a majority of the bible is history based on 3500 years of believers, but you don't accept anything else that way?
don't you think thats a bit absurd?

sorry but thats just plain strange, what does genesis have to do with loving people and believing in god? why does genesis have any bearing on what jesus taught about god?
so what if the authors of genesis didn't get how god created the universe, they did it from what they could understand. being that jesus grew up as a jew, you would think he would learn this story, but it doesn't say he believed it, it says he taught the story.
why is it that he has to believe it for it to have meaning?he never says "i believe genesis is true!" he says something along the lines of "as you know from the torah, god created man and woman" do you think they would understand things like "god took some goo then over billions of years caused it to turn into man and woman"?
or would he use stuff they know to make a point?sorry but if this is how faith has to work, i'd rather stick to nonfaith, this arguement is just weak imo

I'll say it again, since you always ignore it: Your precious "majority opinion" also gave us the wonders of geocentrism and slavery. The "majority opinion" is conspicuously and consistently fallible.And any "majority opinion" that takes the flood myth as literal history is also notoriously wrong.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

You reminded me of a famous quote:

quote:

---

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

​

- Stephen Roberts

---

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Hmmmmmm...... really?I'm afraid you're going to have to define what you mean by "majority opinion." Because you must not be including in your "majority" the 2/3 of the people in the world who aren't christians. You must also not be counting the single largest denomination of christianity, catholicism, which comprises more than 1/2 of all christians world wide. Certainly none of these people read every passage in the bible as being literally true.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

You'll find that Faith's opinion is the majority. She doesn't really bother with facts and figures, they often get in the way of the truth. For example, for about 3000 of the 3500 years she mentions here, no one took the Bible at face value. No Jewish scholars and no Christian church fatehrs took the Bible at face value.Ask Faith to name a Church Father who read the Bible in the same literal sense as she does. Her answer will be interesting.So, the majority of Christians have NEVER taken the Bible literally, in the face value sense of literal.Faith never allows facts to get in the way of her claims. She is probably used to discussing these issues with other Christians who never doubt anything she says, she gets away with spouting nonsense with them and thinks it will work here.Brian.

I don't see the point you are making, Ringo. Are you hinting that geocentrism and slavery are morally wrong? Isn't all morality subjective?

Too funny. The ONLY books that are in ALL of the canons are the first five books. The "Gimme that Old Time Religion" defense yet again.Why Faith?Why is YOUR Canon inspired and the other Canons not inspired?What is the evidence you use to tell which is the God inspired one?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

My point is that the "majority opinion" has changed. Most of the "majority" that Faith cites would disagree with her on a large number of issues. She can't claim "majority opinion" where it agrees with her and ignore it where it disagrees.There's no need to bring morality and/or subjectivity into every thread. Try to focus.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I thought the point you were making was that majority opinion cannot be trusted: Case in point: geocentrism and slavery--which are morally wrong.That was your point, but you switched it up in this latest post.You used the word "fallible" not "changeable."

Yes - cannot be trusted because it keeps changing. If you're going to teach English, you really should learn to read it.
I never said anything about "morally wrong". The word "fallible" doesn't necessarily imply morality.Would "fickle" be less confusing to you?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

And I've said it before and will say it again, slavery is endemic to the human race, and the revelation of the Bible is what finally did away with it. It died hard. It's hardwired in fallen human nature.And Galileo had to contend with Aristotle not the Bible. Aristotle's pagan geocentrism is what had taken root in the Catholic church, while the Bible was twisted to rationalize it. My point was that you are outnumbered. Your opinion is outnumbered.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yet the Bible both condones and demands the practice of Slavery beginning in Genesis and right straight through. There is NO place in the Bible where it says "Slavery is wrong and an abomination."

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion