The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

[Diogenes]

The proposition for debate is that when one takes the tales of Genesis literally, one becomes intellectually disabled, at least temporarily. Taking Genesis literally requires one to reject biology (which includes evolution) and other sciences in favor of 'magic.' Geology and radiometric dating have to be rejected since the Earth formed only about 6000 years ago, during the same week the Earth was made (in a single day).

Much of the debate in the topic of Science and Religion consists of theists who insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis rejecting basic science. Most of the resulting debates are not worth engaging in.

[dad1]

As I said, you're trying to find a way to support your assumption of a literal history in Genesis, and thereby missing the entire point of the creation story. It's not about imaginary wormholes.

It is about windows of heaven and a flood. Calling that imaginary simply shows you do not believe.

For you, they are distractions, imaginary things that you focus on, instead of the message God has for you.

Part of His word to man is that He created all things. That is not imaginary, as much as some might cling to the stories of pagan science and place these over what He said.

It's true. Your additions to His words are not true.

There is no indication in Gen six that the giants referred to were men or woman or angels. You rule out the giant dinos because you do not believe that creation including man and all creatures one week really happened. Period.

[dad1]

Not believing the legitimate news reports is consistent with not believing mainstream science.

Who stamps a news source as legitimate? That is insane. CNN? Infowars? You do not get to decide what is true or false.

No, the truth decides that. The fact is all the major news sources: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, NPR, BBC and even Fox News basic news report the same facts. It's Fox News commentators like *ucker Carlsen, Hannity, and Ingram who promote falsehoods, pandering to right wing Christian Nationalists that are the outliers and out right liars. That they tell you what you want to hear does not make them truth tellers.

Despite some news sources reading from the same script, that does not make it true. There are many examples of false things in the news.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-disin ... ogan-media

You seem to forget that people now have access to worldwide news sources. It becomes clear pretty fast which ones are slanted. For example Al Jazeera seems to emphasize stories that are anti Russia, pro Ukraine, while RT news does the opposite. One should realize this if one wanted a balanced view. As for truth, well, one should not look to media for that. But for you to hold up major US and mainstream media as sources of truth that should not be questioned is truly absurd and delusional.

[dad1]

The windows were some sort of openings in the sky that allowed water to pass through. There was water up there, on the other side of the stars. The firmament was the place where He made the stars and it separated waters below here from the waters on the other side of it. Therefore, I deduce <…>

<bolding mine>

Might need a bit more work on Premises 1 and 2 there, before you get to the deducing part…

Those premises are bible based. So, for someone who does not believe the bible at all, we might say, 'If God's word is true, then we can deduce...'

[Diogenes]

Those premises are bible based.

So what? In any debate on this forum, references to the Bible are not evidence.
From the guidelines to this forum, "Science and Relgion:"

While posters may certainly take positions based on religious doctrine, the Bible or other religious writings are not to be considered evidence for scientific claims.

viewtopic.php?t=216

Therefore, your "Bible based" claims might as well be from the Quran, The Lord of the Rings, Necromancy, Mickey Mouse, or any other ancient superstition or other discredited religious manifesto.

[The Barbarian]

Therefore, your "Bible based" claims might as well be from the Quran, The Lord of the Rings, Necromancy, Mickey Mouse, or any other ancient superstition or other discredited religious manifesto.

Like most/all of those, dad's new beliefs are purely man-made. I see he has now abandoned any attempt at reason, and is just repeating unsupported assertions.

[JoeyKnothead]

I may be wrong, but it seems to me that abortion and created gender (male and female as opposed to anything else) were bigger issues. Since media is not believable any more, I would take the events of that day with a grain of salt. There are many claims that there were provocateurs that were agitating and leading the group that went to the capitol area. I don't think it is fair or 'history' to pretend that possibly a majority of the US voters had anything to do with that. As for election cheating, that is an issue. Here we seem to have a similar debilitating effect on the life hating liberals that swallow cheap propaganda and slander whole.

Wow.

I guess he grabbed you by yours.

Yet, the bottom line with so many people I have seen is abortion. Trump didn't seemed to claim he was pro life. The whole other party seems to clamor for more and easier child sacrifices.

You should find other places to inhabit beyond abortion clinics. For many mothers, the bottom line is how will they provide housing, clothes, and schooling for their rapist's child.

[brunumb]

You can call the windows in the sky that brought flood waters anything you like. But you seem to be insinuating that the whole point of God's record of the beginning is that it is all not true in any real way?

In actual fact the point is that man is supposed to believe it.

We have learnt that there are no windows in the sky and the stars are not just twinkling lights above the earth. It is just religious propaganda. The fact is that only gullible man is supposed to believe it.

[dad1]

So what? In any debate on this forum, references to the Bible are not evidence.

If you mean does it prove that the windows of heaven existed or not, no. No one claims it does. But when someone mentions those windows that only are found in the bible, it is proper to point out that the water came from them.

Now if all you want to do is admit complete ignorance on them, and admit you do not know either way, fine. If you want to claim that the bible does not talk about them, that is another matter.
So you pretending that addressing such a poster was meant to be scientific evidence is offensive and rude and against forum rules, is it not?

[dad1]

You should find other places to inhabit beyond abortion clinics. For many mothers, the bottom line is how will they provide housing, clothes, and schooling for their rapist's child.

Easy. You know the percentage of abortions that are due to rape??!! You realize many people would love to adopt? Connect the dots.

Here are stats from one site.

"WHY DO ABORTIONS OCCUR?

In 2004, the Guttmacher Institute anonymously surveyed 1,209 post-abortive women from nine different abortion clinics across the country. Of the women surveyed, 957 provided a main reason for having an abortion. This table lists each reason and the percentage of respondents who chose it.
Percentage Reason
<0.5% Victim of rape"

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_a ... tatistics/

Of that half of one percent I would ask how many actually were raped and how many just said they were and who checks?

[dad1]

We have learnt that there are no windows in the sky and the stars are not just twinkling lights above the earth.

Speak for yourself, I knew there were none long before any debate here. That should be obvious, since they opened for a short time and then closed many thousands of years ago. Expecting them to be there now is lunacy.
Since you have no science or evidence to back up any claim that there either were or were not windows of heaven, your opinion on the matter has no currency whatsoever.