Dinosaurs & The Bible - Page 3

Fascinating. How did Christ drive demons out of people and into animals? Are there still demons amongst us?

It depends how you defined demons. What was called demons for the most part we would not call mental illness. It can even be argued that Paul believed that Satan was in the mind of every human being. Satan being the blocker or obstruction of human activity. This is in a way why a study of history is need to understand religion. The two subjects are interlinked.

Interesting. Wouldn't it be kind of confusing to call mental illnesses demons, though? Wouldn't it be better to just clearly explain the concept? I mean, people thought there were actual demons! Or, did the early writers of the Bible just write as best they could? It's all so confusing.

If Satan is merely the "blocker" of human activity, why personify him? I mean, he comes across as a real entity, not something that's out there in everyone's minds (kind of like a reverse holy spirit). Do you think he was ever corporeal?

With all these different interpretations and adjusted meanings over the years, it's tough to figure out what all the passages mean. You could debate them forever, and folks probably do. I'm glad they got rid of all that "slavery is O.K.", and "genocide is justified if folks usurp your homeland" stuff. It could be really misconstrued, and it was obviously symbolic -- which not enough people realized! What do you think it symbolized?

I think most of the bible is symbolized. One thing you have to keep in mind when reading the bible or the Greek thinkers is that they both had very simple languages, less then 10 thousand word each. The numbers I seem to remember are like 5 or 6 thousand. So both cultures are very metaphorical in their speaking.

Remember when the books were written illness of any kind were though of as super natural events. So mental illness was demons. To people back then everything was fated by some force. Jesus explaining to the people that things happen equally to both the good and the bad was one of his revolutionary ideals.

Luke 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?

Even today most people believe that bad things only happen to bad people, or should.


As far as "genocide is justified if folks usurp your homeland" I personal don't have a problem with it war is genocide, why try to sugar coat it. Why are we killing thousands in Iraq right now, because we are in a war. War is simple about killing the other guy until there is no one left to kill. Think about this what is the lesser of evil wiping out a city here and there, or unending warfare like we have today in so many parts of the world. I am in no way condoning killing, war, or genocide. I just saying it is what it is, and we are what we are as a species.

If the Bible is symbolical, it sure would have been helpful if that was made clear at some point! I mean, we have tons of passages about how it's the "literal" truth, but not much about symbolism. Thanks for clearing it up, though. Still, I am a little confused. If killing gays for being gay was "symbolical", what's it symbolizing? That we shouldn't actually stone them, we should just hate them? Is that much better?

All war is genocide? I hadn't thought about it like that! You've given me much to consider.

Yeah, the same goes for all of that poetry. I mean, how am I supposed to know that The Wasteland didn't actually happen? A fucking author's note would have been nice, Eliot!!!

BlahblahblahnoonebasedareligiononTheWastelandblahb lah

Don't worry! I'm quite aware that, except for a few historical fragments, nothing in the Bible corresponds with the reality in which we live! Or, even common sense and basic human decency.

Why is it that, on this board at least, it's only the atheists who demand that the Bible be taken literally? If this issue so consumes you, why not find a board full of literalists and take the matter to them?

Why does it matters whether a text is the basis for a religion or not? In both cases, it should be pretty obvious to the intelligent reader that the Wasteland and The Bible are not meant to be taken as literal fact without a note in large print informing him that "the following is a work of metaphor and symbolism and is not meant to be interpreted literally."

Tell that to those on the Oprah boards who take the word of the bible literally.

Holy shit.

I am confused. If it is a symbolic book, do you mean that it has many metaphorical elements and the like to speak about God, or that it's a symbolic book about humanity and the like that doesn't purport to be lightning writ by the literal God of the universe?

As the CHUD Boards Liason to the Oprah Boards, I'll inform them that we're going to select a chewer to champion our liberal views of biblical interpretation in debate against their finest literalist. Does anyone have a suggested date for this final battle between the two messageboards?

December 21, 2012.

I mean "the following is a work of metaphor and symbolism and is not meant to be interpreted literally."

Dave, hush. You're just going to confuse it.

Okay, so slavery and homophobia isn't "isn't literally" acceptable? What is it, "symbolically" acceptable? Also, please explain me to how the numerous explicitly defined ways that transgressions should be punished (my favorite: stoning) could possibly be interpreted as symbolic? And, what is the prohibition against shellfish symbolizing? Man's inhumanity to man?

If the Bible isn't to be taken as literal fact, it might as well be taken as a series of stories and parables from ancient peoples that contains equal parts cruelty, pithy wisdom, and nonsense. Which is, in fact, exactly what it is.

Nice use of the Mayan calendar, MissZooey.

Maybe there should be an author's note stating that parables can take place within a historical and societal context?

You're blowing my mind, Abbott. Blowing. my. mind.

It was also written by people of a different era. How many references are there to homosexuality or eating shellfish in the Bible? A few each? That's hardly the main gist of the thing.

Overlord, do you take a holistic approach like this to everything? If someone makes a case for a certain aspect of No Country for Old Men being symbolic or another aspect of it being realistic, do you instantly assume that EVERYTHING about it is symbolic or that EVERYTHING about it is realistic? No, you seemingly only apply this rigid set of parameters to the Bible, perhaps on the basis that it's the foundation of some religions. The problem is that, religious foundation or not, it's still a book - it's a single object, subject to any number of interpretations.

Or it's a series of stories and parables from ancient peoples that contains equal parts entertainment, fanciful-but-easily-retained versions of history, social constructs that were important at the time, and moral lessons that some feel are applicable today.

What you repeatedly fail to understand is that, while the origins and literal veracity of the Bible may involve facts, all of this other stuff is entirely subjective.

Exploding Head Syndrome

Eh, you're right. It's only a few chapters/passages here and there. Genocide, homophobia, bigotry, and slavery aside, it has a lot of wisdom to offer.

You know, I'd be a lot more inclined to appreciate the Bible if it changed its tenor at some point and became less about judgment and more about forgiveness.

Now you're just asking for miracles, LD. That'd be like turning water into wine or raising the dead....

Those are metaphors you literal minded fan-goy!

This is a joke, right?

And where the hell did the dinosaur topic go? It seems I was the last to reference it (gorgeous coloring page aside).

That said, the other night when my friend and I were somewhat inebriated we each drew pictures of what we though Satan looked like. His was a goat made of flames. Mine was a Crab/Bat having butt sex with the lead actress from Dumb and Dumber.

I'm now filled with envy of a some drunk's scribbling of Satan. Thanks, pagoda, you have helped me to reach the nadir of my existence.

Not a problem.....

(....Mama, what is nadir?)

Penis.

Fundamentalist scientology.

Joking, joking.

That said, there are plenty of questions to be raised about faith, rationality, evolution, and the like.

I kind of liked the dinosaur discussion.

Fixed.

Now don't get me started on the subject of dinosaur penis!

The Bible has plenty to say about that!

But the dinosaur discussion was going nowhere. Instead of responding to the actual thoughts of people responding to the question, posters were mocking strawman Christians from some notional other message board somewhere.

I'd wrap my junk in velocipenis for a chance to go all Jacob's Ladder on the redhead from D&D.

You hate me, don't you?

All war is genocide is just my personal opinion, so take it with a grain of salt. Were does murder end and genocide begin?

In the bible there are two different out look on religion, the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The tree of life is a symbol for Jesus and the tree of knowledge is the Law. Also don't forget according to Genesis we die, because of the Law.

You may not know it from talking to most fundies, but the NT views on sin at totally different from the OT. The OT was violators of the Law should die. The NT is since everyone is a sinner, and sin lead to death at some point everyone need forgiveness.

This what Paul says about sex.

1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

This what Paul says about sin.

Romans 6:23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Most fundies seem to miss these point but then they are not very smart and can't understand even simple things like evolution.

it call the New testament

It a symbolic history book about humanity, and God, with some facts through in for fun. The problem for most people seem to be the ideal of literal reality. The bible was written over a thousand years, and the last part was written almost two thousands years ago. At that time there was no literal reality with in the mind of the human race. Literal reality is a new ideal which started forming about 500 years ago. So you have all these fundies, and atheist who feel in order for the book to be true, it has to be taken literal in every since. The people who wrote it just did not see the world that way.

I think that drawing the distinction of Old Testament/Hebrew Bible = judgmental, angry God, New Testament = loving, forgiving God is kind of simplistic at best and anti-semitic at worst. Each has its moments of judgment and forgiveness. Much of what is in the OT that is post-Babylonian exile--i.e., most of it--is concerned with social justice and the equitable treatment of your fellows. The Hebrew Bible is radical in that sense: it is the first extant text in the Near East that both posits the existence of a universal God and calls for the fair treatment of all. It's not for nothing that both Hillel the Great and Christ sum up the thing as follows: Love God with all your heart, all your mind, and all your strength and love your neighbor as yourself.

Christ's message is basically a radicalization of the post-exile prophets and most of his teachings can be read as a midrash on the teachings of the Hebrew Bible. The post-exile prophets all basically said, "I don't know what a just world consists in, but this is definitely not it." Christ's message is the answer to that, that is he says a just world--or the Kingdom of God--is a world in which one choses to respond to his fellows with unconditional regard and forgiveness.

As that may be the OT is founded on the Law, which is die Law brakers, and the NT is founded on the ideal of God forgiveness. Although as Paul say flesh can not inherit the kingdom of heaven. So at this point no one is getting in.


Also the NT say that No one can do this. It is humanly impossible. The unconditional part is a an alien condition to the human thought process. As as a species we only ever do anything conditionally.

If Christ, or God Incarnate, thought this about the human race, it would be extremely odd for him to say something like this: "My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you." ~ John 15:12. If you believe in the divinity of Christ, which Paul certainly did, you're explicitly being called to love your neighbors in the same way that God loves us: unconditionally. If God's love for us were conditional, we'd all be screwed given that we've broken all the conditions he's set out for us.

This why there is no one that is good.

also

1 Corinthians 15:50
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

There is alway faith for the resurrection though. One of the things Paul say, but most do not understand is that the saints, the milk drinkers(infants), are carnal minded, being of the flesh, and that is every last one of us.

Because you're beautiful.

I mentioned in a thread a while back that my in-laws are Evangelicals, and patrons of the Creation Museum. Mom-in-law has a bumper sticker from the museum depicting a little dude running with a T Rex on his back, proudly declaring: "We're taking dinosaurs back...!"

As an atheist, they've long lamented my impending doom, and further lamented that my wife has come out as a closet doubter. Like most fundamentalists, they're good, kind, peaceful creatures who believe in loving everyone...unless "everyone" is someone who looks, thinks, acts, or believes differently.

The bottom line? All conversations become a dead end. Not worth the time or trouble. You can't have a rational conversation with someone who believes in Santa Claus, and revolves their entire existance around Him. Sometimes it's awfully like talking to someone with a mental disorder. And I mean that with all sincerity and zero snark.

Listen everybody knows, Satan but the dinosaur bones on Earth to try and fool us. But God said "Fuck you Satan", and he made the oil out of the bones for our cars in the future.