You don't know logic. You're bringing in something that's not been claimed. Where does it say in the Bible about the lizard? In the narrative, God was cursing the snake for what it's done. I am pointing out to that specific narrative that aligns with the recent discovery by science - snakes used to have legs.
No having control over(dominion) is not the same as battling! Not the point, I am not suggesting anything has dominion over you, just that you do not have dominion over every living thing. You would not find one environmentalist or climate site that would suggest man could make life impossible for all life, just an awful lot of life, man included. Some life might even survive a nuclear winter. Sorry the bible is wrong, man does not have dominion over every living thing!
You have latched on to part of the verse but no explanation why the snakes diet should consist of dust. A snake uses it 'tongue' in the air to detect its prey. A dusty 'tongue' would impair its ability. As to being irrelevant. It's as I said. A SciFi writer does just as well as the Bible - unwittingly. The OP's argument within the context of a mythical story? In a book that is proven to be full of stories, mistakes and exaggerations and deliberate mistruths. Great. Carry on.
Nope, my father isn't religious but does believe in a deity out there and is rather spiritual but hates organized religion as oddly demeaning to women and often cruel to people how would he get that idea?
Yes. Dominion isn't the same as battling! What did I say? To do battle, isn't the same, is it? Man has dominion over animals, or other living things! What animal has EQUAL power with humans. Give me one! Yeah, right. Some animals will go extinct.....if we don't protect them. Hello? Endangered species, ring a bell? Heck, they can't even protect their own habitat, that's why some of them go extinct. Some don't even have the intelligence to change their diet - and just keep on relying on dwindling food supply! You might see yourself as an equal, or inferior to an animal - I don't! Some human MIGHT also, survive a nuclear winter! If there's anyone that's likely to survive a nuclear event, it will be humans - hands down! You know why? They got the INTELLIGENCE - and the MEANS - to prepare for it! Do you imagine animals know what a nuclear event is? Do you imagine the news travelling in the animal grapevine - "uhhh, duck down folks. Kim Jong Fat just farted a nuke towards this direction!" That's your opinion.
None. Atheism has no legs to stand on. The only way it tries to prop itself up is to encroach on, and borrow a leg from agnosticism! Like, "lack of belief?" You see them going through this weird contortion, giving convoluted explanations that makes no sense. Why do you think there's suddenly so many nuances to the definition of an atheist?
The entire reason for all those "Nuances" would be because Christians like YOU constantly make up their own definition of Atheism in order to debase something extremely simple and individual. Just as you folks debase your own brothers for worshipping differently than you do, you for some reason feel the need to make stuff up about people who do not worship at all. One last time (though you will not understand what I am saying) As an Atheist I simply do not believe in your God or anyone elses version of it. You can call me Agnostic for not pretending I "Know" there is not something, somewhere but........I do "Know" your silly interpretation is definitely NOT IT!
Dominion means power or control, we are in a constant battle with living creatures, we have neither power or control. I have no need, the fact is man does not have power over all living things. Then you are being foolish, many living things are superior to you in a given environment. As I have pointed out, there are some living creatures you cannot even survive in their environment, let alone when the bible was written! I would put a cockroach a better chance of survival than man. This is an interesting discussion since it highlights an issue those who are not used to having their opinions challenged face. When you first think of man having dominion over animals it appears obvious, then when you really think about it you realise what rubbish the idea is. Of course those who wrote the bible had no idea of bristle worms that live in volcano vents, or fish that survive in pressures which would crush us.
It's exactly as I said, Atheists have just as many legs to stand on as 'believers' do. You don't understand what you just said. You don't have any idea what you just said. The problem is that you really don't understand the subject. Atheism has nothing to do with Agnosticism and you are really, REALLY confused. "LACK OF BELIEF" is not the same as "DISBELIEF".
I don't know where you get that we Christians make up our own definition of atheism, when in fact.....we question why atheists have different definitions about themselves as atheists! So, I don't understand what you're saying there. Now, you're the real McCoy! That's it! You hit it right on the nail. That's what the defintion of an atheist is: you do not believe in a god or God because you don't believe it/He exists! Well.....obviously, you don't fit the category of those that are being questioned - as an example, those who equivocate by saying, they "lack belief." Then, they go through all the excruciating rigmarole of trying to explain what they mean. You can practically see them sweating bullets trying to make rational of an irrational explanation. Why can't they just give the real definition of atheism? Like you did! You must've confused me with someone else.
Let's do a recap of the verses that are supported or confirmed by modern science. Page 1: The Beginning Earth was covered with water (Genesis 1:2) Light from the sun (Genesis 1:3) One huge ocean, one supercontinent (Genesis 1: 9-10) Origin of life and one-celled organisms in water (Genesis 1: 20-21) From fins.....to wings? (Genesis 1:20-21) Genders and asexual creatures (Genesis 1: 24-27) Page 3: The Human body (Genesis 2: 7) The Snake (Genesis 3:14) Page 5: Man's dominion (Genesis 3)
I think this thread is about you pointing out where by intuitive guesses the bible agrees with some science.You have couched it in those terms so as not to answer awkward questions. Are you seriously suggesting that evidence that snakes once had legs means that your god exists?
Take the arguments as they are presented in the OP - claims or staments in the Bible that are supported or confirmed by modern science. I'm not forcing you to accept them.
I think you struggle with understanding what a debate forum is, you present an idea and we discuss it. You appear to think it is where you make statements. I really do not understand why if you do not want your ideas challenged you just don't write a blog.
the bible is fiction. I appreciate its historical place in literature, but it is not science. No more than other historical books like the Canterbury Tales, the odyssey or The Prince.
