Zone1 Belief in God drops to 81 percent

[surada]

The first five books then. Same question, though. How was the 800 years after Moses determined?

Leviticus and Deuteronomy were written first. Genesis and Exodus were written after the Babylonian exile.

 

[Donald H]

There is no need to denounce anything in the Bible.

You've already denounced "Answers in Genesis" on it's young earth theory.
I'll assume that's your informed opinion after careful study of translations to English from the original.

Ignorant and uneducated people can live the lies in good conscience. Others rely on another mechanism of which I'll discuss if I'm asked. It's almost exclusively to do with childhood indocrination.

 

[Meriweather]

Just what it says.. it's a creation myth.

Fine.

 

[Hollie]

Of course there is. Sometimes I call it the Hebrew Bible; other times I call it the Tanakh. For you, I chose the Old Testament.

Your position is one coming from Christianity. It was Christianity that incorporated Hebrew theology into the newly formed religion.

 

[Hollie]

Doubtful. When context is taken into consideration there are few contradictions.

All the major elements / themes of the Bible are contradictory.

Supernatural creation, a 6,000 year old planet, global flood 4,000 years ago, dead people becoming 'un-deadened' and the list goes on.

 

[Meriweather]

I'll assume that's your informed opinion after careful study of translations to English from the original.

Many Catholics never took the Bible literally. It never occurred to anyone in my family to think that the earth was created in seven days. I learned the creation of earth the standard way taught in my Catholic school's science class. This was back in the 1960s, and our books were fairly old.

It wasn't until years later, when I was adult, that I got together with a man whose first language was Hebrew. He explained the differences. He also pointed out the many places where the same Hebrew word was translated into various English words. That is when I began reading more rabbinical commentaries--the older the better.

 

[Meriweather]

Your position is one coming from Christianity. It was Christianity that incorporated Hebrew theology into the newly formed religion.

The roots of Christianity is Judaism.

 

[Meriweather]

All the major elements / themes of the Bible are contradictory.

Supernatural creation, a 6,000 year old planet, global flood 4,000 years ago, dead people becoming 'un-deadened' and the list goes on.

In the King James English, perhaps. Not so much in the Hebrew.

 

[Hollie]

The roots of Christianity is Judaism.

Obviously.

 

[Hollie]

In the King James English, perhaps. Not so much in the Hebrew.

"Not so much", "kinda' sorta" is playing fast and loose with supernatural creation, a 6,000 year old planet, global flood 4,000 years ago, dead people becoming 'un-deadened'.

Facts matter. So does the truth.

 

[Meriweather]

Obviously.

As far as I know, there has never been any argument or issue with that.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Most modern Christian authorities reject Genesis completely now. In fact, Meriweather has himself rejected the very basis of it.
He can go on about misinterpretations in translation to English but it doesn't change the fact that we agree that it's fatally flawed, as he notes.

Most modern Christian authorities reject Genesis completely now.

You can of course substantiate this?

 

[Meriweather]

"Not so much", "kinda' sorta" is playing fast and loose with supernatural creation, a 6,000 year old planet, global flood 4,000 years ago, dead people becoming 'un-deadened'.

Facts matter. So does the truth.

Hollie, no one ever taught me the Bible was a literal account. I was taught the various forms of literature, and could easily pick out which account was myth, a Just-so story, legend, folklore, fable, history, biography, poetry, play, etc. I was taught the Bible came from the word used for Library. It was a library of ancient books covering different topics--including Law.

If you were taught the Bible was completely literal, you fall into the minority group of which I was never a part. I cannot relate to your angst about apparently being told it was all literal. It is apparent you are now agreeing with the majority that it should not be taken literally. Good.

 

[Hollie]

As far as I know, there has never been any argument or issue with that.

I agree. There is no argument that Christianity co-opted Hebrew theology.

 

[Hollie]

Hollie, no one ever taught me the Bible was a literal account. I was taught the various forms of literature, and could easily pick out which account was myth, a Just-so story, legend, folklore, fable, history, biography, poetry, play, etc. I was taught the Bible came from the word used for Library. It was a library of ancient books covering different topics--including Law.

If you were taught the Bible was completely literal, you fall into the minority group of which I was never a part. I cannot relate to your angst about apparently being told it was all literal. It is apparent you are now agreeing with the majority that it should not be taken literally. Good.

The majority had no choice but to abandon a literal interpretation of the Bible. The argument creationists have regarding biblical accuracy is with one another. For them, it becomes more a matter of just how far they can stretch an interpretation before they completely dismantle the belief system. When the literal word of a god becomes human authored tales and fables that are beyond the bounds of rationality, no amount of creative interpretation can rescue it.

 

[Meriweather]

I agree. There is no argument that Christianity co-opted Hebrew theology.

I doubt you will find many Jews who feel they and their beliefs have been co-opted by anyone--certainly not by Christianity.

 

[Cougarbear]

Absolutely we do. You are talking about private schools. Focus.

The Constitution says no. The first amendment restricts the Government, not the people from free expression and does not limit where that can take place. This has nothing to do with private schools.

 

[Meriweather]

The majority had no choice but to abandon a literal interpretation of the Bible.

You have the story wrong. People didn't think about taking the Bible literally until the enlightenment--and even then it didn't get much traction until the late 1800s. It was never a majority view, and even that minority was slipping into oblivion until some Evangelicals starting banging their drum in the 1970s about everyone taking the Bible literally. That didn't get much traction, either, but apparently you and/or your family got swept up into it.

 

[surada]

You have the story wrong. People didn't think about taking the Bible literally until the enlightenment--and even then it didn't get much traction until the late 1800s. It was never a majority view, and even that minority was slipping into oblivion until some Evangelicals starting banging their drum in the 1970s about everyone taking the Bible literally. That didn't get much traction, either, but apparently you and/or your family got swept up into it.

Yep... Hal Lindsey, Tim Lahaye and the Dallas Theological Seminary.

 

[Cougarbear]

Are you a young earth believer? Pointing out the fact along with Meriweather doesn't make me angry, it brings a feeling of satisfaction on reaching common ground between atheism and his amended belief system. We may work together to find more agreement.

You mean 'vicious' but viscous was good for a chuckle.
I don't want there to be any angry feelings between us. I accept that many Xtians accept the young earth theory.

I listen and study both sides. Both base their conclusions on observational science. Both have a different starting point and manipulate data to justify their hypothesis. The Bible is true as it has been translated correctly. But, I acknowledge that it has not always been translated correctly. I also recognize that the stories of the Bible sometimes cover large time periods in just a few versus and chapters. So, there is a lot of missing information as well. But also, the old earth believers have lots of things wrong as well.