Matthew Le God

How do you decide which bits of the Bible are metaphors and which bits aren't? Leaving it to interpretation leads to schisms and wars!

Yet again... another completely flawed comparison. - The name of a barbers or pub is irrelevant to getting a pint or haircut. - Why would a non literal Noah ark believing person want to visit this place...? It is a museum full of claims of the literal flood story! The exhibits claim it literally happened!

This is deeply flawed and irrelevant as The Bible is claimed by many to be the infallible word of god. It is not comparable to a person using such phrases.

Check your duck toaster for an answer...

1) The Bible is not abstract art. It is believed by millions to be the word of god. If people are deciding themselves which is literal and which isn't then that leads to an unclear message. 2) Well they do. Bible belt Americans believe in the literal Noah genocide flood story. There is a $100m theme park for the ark! 3) Millions of Christians believe the Bible is the word of god.

1) You said parts of it are not to be taken literally. Yet the book does not say that. 2) My point is that it is an inept god who wants his message to the world to be spread by a book that some think is literal and others think should not be all taken literally. That causes confusion. 3) 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion That is clearly false as there is confusion over to take it literally or not. Millions do and millions don't = confusion! 4) If a creator god is all knowing and knows the future it is logically impossible for humans to have free will. He knew when he created humans what they would do in the future and he created them in such a way that he knew their future... thus free will is impossible.

Try actually answering the questions in that post. The book is supposed to be the word of god. It makes no attempt to explain that it is not all literal, nor does it tell you which parts are literal and which parts are not. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion He clearly failed! As there is a huge amount of confusion over if you should believe the Noah story is literal. Millions think you should.... millions think you shouldn't. So God ****ed up getting his message across without confusion!

1) Can you direct me to where in the Bible says that not all of this should be taken literally? 2) Do you agree millions of people do take the Noah and creation stories literally? 3) Why would an intelligent God make it unclear which stories are supposed to be taken literally or not? Clearly he has failed making it clear as millions of people do take it literally. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion He clearly failed! As there is a huge amount of confusion over if you should believe the Noah or creation story is literal. Millions think you should.... millions think you shouldn't. So God ****ed up getting his message across without confusion!

Millions of people do believe that. 1) Can you direct me to where in the Bible says that not all of this should be taken literally? 2) Do you agree millions of people do take the creation story literally? 3) Why would an intelligent God make it unclear which stories are supposed to be taken literally or not? Clearly he has failed making it clear as millions of people do take it literally. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion He clearly failed! As there is a huge amount of confusion over if you should beleive the Noah story is literal. Millions think you should.... millions think you shouldn't. So God ****ed up getting his message across without confusion!

You have now proven you don't understand what a theory is! Put a dictionary on your birthday list.

'and vice versa' = whichever way round it was! As it didn't actually happen the flood water was neither salt or freshwater... because it is made up nonsense!

1) Can you direct me to where in the Bible says that not all of this should be taken literally? 2) Do you agree millions of people do take the Noah story literally? 3) Why would an intelligent God make it unclear which stories are supposed to be taken literally or not? Clearly he has failed making it clear as millions of people do take it literally. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion He clearly failed! As there is a huge amount of confusion over if you should beleive the Noah story is literal. Millions think you should.... millions think you shouldn't. So God ****ed up getting his message across without confusion!

My explanation coming from Wikipedia of want constitutes a scientific theory was correct. That is what a scientific theory is, the fact it came from Wikipedia doesn't make it wrong. Are you seriously denying that is an accurate representation of what it is? People often confuse general usage of 'theory' as just being a guess, but a'scientific theory' is not merely a guess, it is an explanation of something using demonstrable evidence.

You compared the changes of human's common ancestor with fish to human, with changes over a few days. That shows you lack understanding that small changes over hundreds of millions of years over a vast number of generations can lead to big differences and that it is not remotely the same as thinking a population of fish can alter significantly during a few days of rain.

Admitting defeat on your understanding of how huge changes are possible over 375,000,000 years but not possible over 40 days of rain? We can talk about the mass murder by god of the babies of Egypt if you want. Nice kind and loving god to do that isn't he? Those babies were completely innocent and he murdered them.

You are unable to explain why I am wrong. Give it a go! 375 million years = lots of time to evolve from fish to man 40 days of rain = not enough time for even one new generation of an animal, let alone for them to adapt from salt-water to freshwater It really is basic stuff here Turkish!

I'll try explaining this to you again... - humans common ancestor with fish was 375 million year ago - in 375 million years you have a vast amount of time for populations to change You appear to think 375 million years for chances to occur is comparable to animals changing during a few days of rain from salt-water to freshwater and back again. Can you really not see the difference between small changes in generations over 375 million years is vastly different from changes over 40 nights of rain?

You don't understand the basics of evolution. You have demonstrated that you don't today when you said it has an end point. I may be pedantic, boring, irritating... but on this you are just being dumb (and wrong... very wrong)!

That does not say all freshwater fish. Nor does it matter if I did say all. It is completely irrelevant to rebutting the point that many species cannot live in both... yet they all lived before, during and after the flood. Proving the flood did not happen.

My post pointed out the flaws in your answers.

It is 2020 and you don't understand the basics of evolution.

Unable to form a rebuttal?

1) I didn't say that. Even if I did, that doesn't remove the point that not all could survive which debunks the account in the Bible. 2) The Bible does not say it was localised. It also does not say do not take this literally. If god was intelligent he wouldn't want to create confusion over which bits actually happened and which are stories. 3) That does not explain where the water came from or went afterwards. 4) Bones structure is one of many differences. I didn't say it was the only one.

All it requires is you to acknowledge what you said was nonsense. 1) The eye is not an organism as you claimed 2) We know how the eye evolved from a few light sensitive cells to a pinhole camera style, to a human eye. All it requires is small changes over time. We have time, lots of time. The earth is more than 4.5 billion years old.

Would you ignore gods commandment about killing disobedient children? Won't he be ****ed off you ignored his commandment?