Zone1 Question For Catholics

[Meriweather]

If we are to accept the story to be literally true

Again, that's your criterion, that the story must be all literal or all allegory. The theme/lesson uses both.

 

[Meriweather]

I was talking about this:

the tree of life - Search Videos

Make no mistake my friend, I've moved toward your thinking priorities as far as I can.

It's a wonderful story and it's narrated beautifully by Attenborough.

My understanding at this point in our discussion is that you are in agreement with what is said. But that is conditional on the understanding that the God created everything.

If we're going to continue our discussion, that condition is what we have to talk about!

That's not me saying that we can't also talk about the tree of knowledge.

I know you were talking about the Tree of Life. It doesn't feature in the story of Noah's Ark.

 

[Donald H]

I know you were talking about the Tree of Life. It doesn't feature in the story of Noah's Ark.

You didn't answer my question on whether you agree with Attenborough's explanation on the tree of life. And of course your church's conditional acceptance of same.

The Noah's ark story implies that the 'tree of life' is impossible.

 

[Meriweather]

You didn't answer my question on whether you agree with Attenborough's explanation on the tree of life. And of course your church's conditional acceptance of same.

The Noah's ark story implies that the 'tree of life' is impossible.

No comment. It has nothing to do with the Biblical Tree of Life, but rather what Attenborough decided to call his synopsis of evolutionary life.

 

[Donald H]

No comment. It has nothing to do with the Biblical Tree of Life, but rather than what Attenborough decided to call his synopsis of evolutionary life.

I'm agreeing that the biblical tree of life and everything else in the bible is 'allegory', if you choose to have it that way.

You'll have to try me on any of your assertions of some things in the bible being literally true. The Noah's ark story doesn't make the cut, but I can assure you that I'm going to be reasonable.

Do you still want to end our discussions? You're free to do that but be advised that I won't!

 

[Meriweather]

I'm agreeing that the biblical tree of life and everything else in the bible is 'allegory', if you choose to have it that way.

You'll have to try me on any of your assertions of some things in the bible being literally true. The Noah's ark story doesn't make the cut, but I can assure you that I'm going to be reasonable.

The Bible is a collection of stories, history, poetry, songs, fables, allegories, apocalyptic literature, law--you name it, and its probably there. The Bible is not a single book but a collection of books, like a small library. If you think everything in the Bible is allegory, that's wrong. If you think everything is the Bible is literal, that's equally wrong. If you think everything in a certain book is falls into a single category, that's most likely wrong as well. What is true about the Bible are the moral lessons that might be learned from the accounts in it.

The story of Noah's Ark might not make your cut because you are looking for facts, while I'm looking for the theme and lessons it teaches. Therefore, even though the story doesn't make your cut, it certainly makes mine.

 

[Donald H]

The Bible is a collection of stories, history, poetry, songs, fables, allegories, apocalyptic literature, law--you name it, and its probably there. The Bible is not a single book but a collection of books, like a small library.

I won't debate that but I have to question the quality of the library. It's supportive of slavery and many other horrendous behaviours that may have once been acceptable, but doesn't work in a modern world. God forbid it becomes popular enough to be taken literally.

If you think everything in the Bible is allegory, that's wrong.

I don't, but you deny me your references to the literal truths.

If you think everything is the Bible is literal, that's equally wrong.

I've been given no literal truths by you or any of our Christians, so there's zero chance of that at this point.

If you think everything in a certain book is falls into a single category, that's most likely wrong as well.

What do you mean by a 'single category'? It can't be all allegory or all literal truths! You couldn't have missed me saying that or inferring that, dozens of times!

What do you mean?

What is true about the Bible are the moral lessons that might be learned from the accounts in it.

Same question as above really. What moral lessons? I'm still really not sure of the lesson in the Noah's ark story. We can't even begin by making it a true story or just allegory! You decide and then I'll make my own attempt to find and understand the lesson.

The story of Noah's Ark might not make your cut because you are looking for facts, while I'm looking for the theme and lessons it teaches. Therefore, even though the story doesn't make your cut, it certainly makes mine.

I'm looking for facts and/or I'm looking for allegory. You deny me and all the other Christians the distinctions.

Can you state that it's not literally true, but it's allegory with a valuable lesson. You'll be surprised how much you can gain by simply doing that!

note: you can make the Noah's ark story 50/50, but then you have to be specific with examples.

 

[Meriweather]

I won't debate that but I have to question the quality of the library. It's supportive of slavery and many other horrendous behaviours that may have once been acceptable, but doesn't work in a modern world. God forbid it becomes popular enough to be taken literally.

Was God the Political Leader of those times? No. God was working with mankind. Slavery of Jews by Jews was more in line with indentured servants. As for conquered people, societies of that time slaughtered those they defeated, sent them into exile, or enslaved them. By the time of Jesus, very few Jews owned slaves, due to teachings on how best to treat both neighbor and stranger. God meets us where we are and draws us closer to best behaviors.

 

[Donald H]

Was God the Political Leader of those times? No. God was working with mankind. Slavery of Jews by Jews was more in line with indentured servants.

Complete with instructions on how they could be beaten and how they could murder a slave, as long as he/she lived for 2 days. Indentured servant??

The facts on keeping slaves and the permitted beating of the slaves is deserving of a long and detailed discussion. Are you sure you want to go there? I think you're better than that!

As for conquered people, societies of that time slaughtered those they defeated, sent them into exile, or enslaved them. By the time of Jesus, very few Jews owned slaves, due to teachings on how best to treat both neighbor and stranger. God meets us where we are and draws us closer to best behaviors.

So far I respect you but if we bring slavery into the questions, there will be no limits observed by me.

Let's not.

 

[Meriweather]

Are you sure you want to go there? I think you're better than that!

And I thought you were over blaming God.

 

[Donald H]

And I thought you were over blaming God.

I don't consider the bibles to be the word of your God. I'm not asking the same question of you.

 

[ding]

I don't consider the bibles to be the word of your God. I'm not asking the same question of you.

Do you consider anything the word of God? Because otherwise you post is without distinction and irrelevant.

 

[ding]

And I thought you were over blaming God.

The world being unfair is probably the number one argument of militant atheists.

 

[Donald H]

Do you consider anything the word of God?

No, not literally, but sometimes yes, allegorically.

Because otherwise you post is without distinction and irrelevant.

Yes, it would be if I refused to accept the allegorical message.

Do you believe it's the literal truth?

 

[ding]

No, not literally, but sometimes yes, allegorically.

Like what? What do you allegorically find to be the word of God?

 

[ding]

No, not literally, but sometimes yes, allegorically.

Yes, it would be if I refused to accept the allegorical message.

Do you believe it's the literal truth?

No. The distinction is irrelevant because it’s the same in all cases.

 

[Donald H]

Like what? What do you allegorically find to be the word of God?

I said I would accept the bibles to be the word of the god, if I didn't accept the allegorical message.

Do you have anything specific in mind for me? Something that you consider to be literally true?

 

[Donald H]

No. The distinction is irrelevant because it’s the same in all cases.

The literal truth and the allegory are the same? Not according to the dictionary's meaning of 'allegory'.

 

[ding]

I said I would accept the bibles to be the word of the god, if I didn't accept the allegorical message.

Do you have anything specific in mind for me? Something that you consider to be literally true?

That’s not what you said. You can’t provide an example for what you said. So rather than admitting that, you changed it.

 

[ding]

The literal truth and the allegory are the same? Not according to the dictionary's meaning of 'allegory'.

No idea what you are trying to say. But since you keep changing what you say, does it really matter?