FOSSILS prove that Christianity/Islam/Judaism are just fairy tales for adults

If atheists were honest, acknowledging that many ancient histories were filled with analogies and parables, and would stop pretending that every Christian, Jew, and er ... Muslims which have no OT or Torah, interpreted everything in a literal sense and would notice attempts to harmonize theinterpretation of these allegorical sources and modern understanding.

After all, if the atheists on the forum could put aside their overt hatred for just a moment, they might notice that the pattern of genesis, certainly not the time span, conforms exactly to what modern science reveals - including things like life in the ocean before land.

But don;t let actual open mindedness cloud the Crusades going on here ... proceed.

 

You aint gotta be an atheist to instantly recognize that there are no "patterns" of Genesis that say anything about life in the water before land-life.

In fact, the first mention of life in Genesis is land plants.

 

There has been some scientific study on this. A day to God is not 24 hours. It was possible that the Creation story in Genesis goes along with the big bang. I'm no expert but I have read some things that prove (try) this. The first day to God was around 1-2 billion years. I believe it was measured on how light expanded through the galaxy. Someone else might be able to better explain this than me. But the end result is the same. Science will invariably bring us closer to proving the existence of God.

 

That's only if a god exists, and which one?

You seem to have a bias already.

 

Who doesn't acknowledge that modern theologians and religious believers attempt to reconcile old writings with modern scientific knowledge? Of course they they attempt to do that! They are also invariably wrong when they attempt to reinterpret prehistoric flat-earther claims in some kind of "metaphorical" sense to attempt to harmonise them with the universe as we know it today, but there you go. Genesis does not describe reality as we understand it today - it is a creation story (or really, a collection of stories) from times when astronomy and astrology were one and the same, and people had no idea what the Earth, the Sun and all the other (visible) heavenly bodies actually were or how they related to one another. They had no clue about the age of the Earth, nor about evolution. You might as well ask a stone aged tribesman to describe the origins and workings of a computer..

 

Only fundamentalist Christians and Atheists actually believe the Bible says the world is only a few thousand years old. Don't you think this kinda stuff has been common knowledge for a while?

I don't understand the hatred from some atheists have for their parents. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe they tell us these things because they may actually believe them and are doing what they think was best for you?

 

I think you're painting Genesis with too broad a brush. Genesis is a fairly large book with some very literal truths and events. Was Abraham real or was he not? Did God make a covenant with him or did he not? Sure we could say the first 11 Chapters which deal with the creation of the world and man are mostly allegorical, but there has to be some literal truths even within that. There had to be an actual fall, a real choice that the first humans made that required Christ's intervention.

 

To put it in another perspective

what do Orthodox Christians believe

source

and

source

 

It also very clearly states that large animals are first created in the Seas rather than on land ... go figure.

Now, lets talk about what Prophecy is and is not. Imagine yourself as a practical cave man millenia ago, and the theory of evolution and the Big Bang are revealed to you in aboslute perfection. How would you express it in two paragraphs or less using the venacular of the day? Agian imagine seeing in a vision, not in words, the entire process from start to finish in one grand fats moving vision. You then have to explaion it only in oral tradition first, and it has to pass through an unknown set of intermeadiaries, and the main point and detail that they want to get across is the answer to the question: Who created this universe? God did.

The Bible then goes on to explain "WHY" he created it, a process that is slowly reealed over the millenia through the OT and NT.

And yet, if you interpret Genesis through that light, you are clearly an ardent Biblical literalist with no brain, and you 'ain't gotta be an atheist' to use Genesis as a tool for insulting people? Well, I disagree - you DO have to be an atheist to so repeatedly blow off siad interpretations, overly generalize all Christians and strick literal fundamentalist, and then ignore the rest of teh Bible while missing the main point of Genesis.

And, as you say, you don't have to be an atheist to see such pattern emerging do you?

 

There is only one literal truth. God Created the Universe. The how?

Well see above.

It fits into God' plan of salvation perfectly. The universe was created to afford you, me, even the worst of the atheists, a chance to be separated from God's prescence, to bumble about and suceed and fail, to sin and bear the consequences, and use the gift of atonement to eventually return to him wiser in most cases ... or, as I look at some of the atheists on this forum, merely embarassed and chastized, and better serve our Father.

That is WHY the universe was created.

 

I guess it would involve a talking snake and a woman being made out of a man's rib while he was fast asleep!

I see the pattern, now! (Can you tell I'm rolling my eyes at you, yet?)

It aint a matter of limited vernacular and it aint a matter of "they never would have believed it if they were told to them plainly" because they believed all kinds of horse(*)(*)(*)(*) that had not been observed.


Your hypothetical presupposes that the theory of evolution or the big bang actually was revealed. That's a claim you aint even came close to proving and you aint gonna have it just "given."


Here's a list of cognitive biases that must be employed to even entertain that genesis is factually correct:

Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
Semmelwies reflex
Subjective Validation
Confirmation bias
Bayesian bias
Experimenter's biasIllusory correlation
Irrational escalation
Ostrich Effect
Selective perception
Hindsight bias
Illusion of validity



And you have to employ a lot more to get to your claim "the pattern of genesis conforms exactly to what modern science reveals - including things like life in the ocean before land. "

Sorry, bub. I've read Genesis, many, many times. It gives no timeline of life or says "this came before that" or "out of the ocean first." The only exception is when describing the first seven days and all it says is that land plants came on the fourth day and animals came of the fifth. And even that is factually wrong.

 

DON'T YOU GET IT, IF GOD CAN'T EVEN COMMUNICATE TO THEM ACCURATELY HOW LONG A *DAY* IS, THEN IT'S JUST A MADE UP FAIRY TALE. Stop trying to rationalize what's clearly fiction. It's a lie, and we've been conned for thousands of years.

 

IO see that you wantonly ignored the explanation provided, and have returned to the dogmatic ritual of bashing Bibical literalism when none is offered.

Tell me, what cognitive bias or mental disability causes someone to smash something that isn't even there?

Is there a reason, a bias perhaps, that prevents atheists from acknowledging, as has been for hundreds of years now, that Genesis creation narrative is allegorical rather than literal?

What will you have to smash if you have to deal with reality?

 

He probably did. That doesn;t mean the human who had to translate it to a people who were illiterate and could not grasp BILLIONS would be understood. Once again, another atheist ignores reality and insist on HIS interpretation of something so he can mock his own arrogant ignorance. What a shock.

You atheists do seem to enjoy yout status as the least respected faith choice in the world. You fight so terribly hard to keep it. The lanterne rouge of the religious world.

 

God did communicate the idea in writing, and it has taken all this time for some people to realize the first six "days" were billions/millions of Earth Years long.

Clearly, the sun was not MADE to reign over Erath time until first life appeared on Earth, during that "Third Archean/Proterozoic Era:"








1. Formative/Cosmologic Era-Hadean Era/ = First Day

2. Hadean Era-Archaean Era/ = Second Day

3. Archaean Era-Proterozoic Era/ = Third Day

4. Proterozoic Era-Paleozoic Era/ = Fourth Day

5. Paleozoic Era-Mesozoic Era/ = Fifth Day

6. Mesozoic Era-Cenozoic Era/ = Six Day

7. Cenozoic Era-Common Era/ = Seventh Day

 

The reason is their demand for Sexual Luicense even to the destruction of the Family Units society depends upon.

These people usually attack the bible with psuedo-scientific criticism and are blind to theBible writers' literary art used to communicate ideas to us, which have had to pass through countless generations of people less educated is because the bible argues that Sexual Prudence is necessary for the salvation of the Golden Ages the forefathers built and they will tear down again and again:





Rev. 17:3 So he carried me away (in the spirit of thought), into the wilderness (of my imagination) and I saw (as if) a woman, ...



.... (those who have Institutionalized a system of sexual seduction into a failed matrimony), sit upon a scarlet coloured beast (of a brazen and corrupt sexually misdirected economic system: [Dan 3:1-5]), full of names of (Pagan) blasphemy, having seven heads:
(which existed in (1) Egypt, (2) Assyria, (3) Babylon, (4) Persia/Mede, (5) Greece, (6) Rome (7) the whole of Western Culture to follow)...







... having ten horns upon these seven heads:
(1. Undivided Empire; capital Rome: [305 AD],

2. Western Roman Empire: (Romulus Augustus): [to 476 AD],

3. Eastern Roman: Byzantine Empire, [1453 AD]

4. Charlemagne, [800 - 1000 AD]

5. Holy Roman Empire, [1200 AD-1492 AD]

6. Italy, [Renaissance, 16th century]

7. Spain, [17th century]

8. France, [18th-19th Century]

9. Britain, [19th-20th century]

10. Nazi Germany, [20th century])


11. America next…?

 

I aint an atheist.

I believe that if the bible is true, the entire thing, including Jesus is allegorical.


I wasn't talking about literalism. I was talking about the ridiculous notion that if God were to give some cavemen the the truth of evolution they wouldn't waste those 2 paragraphs you limited them to by creating an allegory that had no bearing on evolution.

Yeah, that's right! Talking snakes and women out of ribs are crappy concepts either way. Metaphor ot literal, they don't convey truth.


So it wasn't MY bias that brought literalism into it, it was YOURS.


As for smashing things, I just demolished your position. How's that for a reality check?