RE: Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic
March 8, 2018 at 12:24 am
(This post was last modified: March 8, 2018 at 12:40 am by Angrboda.)
(March 7, 2018 at 11:52 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(March 7, 2018 at 5:45 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: That's irrelevant. What matters is whether the author of Genesis intended it to be taken literally. It's consistent with both the time period and the genre that he did. Against that are incredibly weak textual arguments that it was intended as allegory. The fact that some body of people treat it as allegory is more an artifact of people realizing that holding to a literal interpretation of Genesis puts them in the position of defending things like the flood, which they realize they can't reasonably defend. It's a tactical retreat, unrelated to the facts of history which are that originally, it was accepted as literal. You're always going on about how the authors of the gospels "would have known eye witnesses," implying that their proximity to the events is a testament to their historical validity, yet when it comes to Genesis, you implicitly argue against that standard; you seem to have a double standard here.
And you're basing this on what exactly? A contemporaneous document instructing readers to take it literally? Your entire post is pure conjecture and the product of your own hubris. You're assuming that people in ancient cultures were just shallow rubes, incapable critical thinking, when in fact it is obvious to any art historian that ancient cultures were clearly more sophisticated and adept at communicating meaning symbolically than we so called enlightened moderns...especially you.
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.
Exodus 20:11, NASB
The bible itself testifies to a literal interpretation of Genesis, and the early church fathers testify to a literal belief in the flood (HERE). That you want to make a strategic retreat from literalism because your bible doesn't square with the facts means absolutely squat. Your attempt to retcon the bible to satisfy the demands of reality is simply your attempt to evade the truth, which is that your religion is a bunch of bullshit.
Then He said, “Hear now My words: if there is a prophet among you, I, the Lord, make Myself known to him in a vision; I speak to him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses; he is faithful in all My house. I speak with him face to face, even plainly, and not in dark sayings; And he sees the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses?”
Numbers 12:6–8, ESV [emphasis mine]
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)