[Serious] Literal and Not Literal

[EgoDeath]

When people have something they perceive as miraculous, a vision from God, God speaking to them, visions of heaven, hell, etc... They indicate that, not so much for the sake of adding credibility to what they're saying, but to share that they had such a profound experience.

If the author of Genesis had such an experience why would they not have shared it? Why would they have kept it to themselves? Now maybe you'll get creative and offer an explanation, but do you actually think that was the case? Or are you just throwing it out as a possibility?

Once again, why would they have shared it? Because another author did in a different book? Why hold two different others, who lived at different times and wrote things at different times to the same set of criteria? You're still not explaining this, you just keep going around in circles and then attempt to throw the question back at me.

I don't know if there's an unknown better explanation than the theory of evolution, that in the future might be discovered and falsify it. But this unknown doesn't cause me to stop believing in the theory of evolution.

You're not supposed to believe in evolution. You review the evidence in support of it and either accept it as fact or don't. If the current facts of evolution end up support a more nuanced, or bigger idea, then great. That would be a fascinating thing to happen for the world.

Sure, i read it and form an interpretation the same way I read what you wrote and form an interpretation of what you're communicating. If other people hold different interpretations, than I might go out and explore them, perhaps they make better sense of the over all context, are aware of some historical factors at the time I wasn't aware of, or had a better grasp of original language, etc...Sometime more than one interpretation sounds equally reasonable, and I can't decide between the two. Sometimes I realize my initial interpretation was wrong.

So, by that logic, maybe your current interpretation of the Bible is wrong?

I decide it based on explanatory power, which one takes into account the context and history better, the overall passage etc... Which one answers more questions than it raises. Sometimes two sides can have equally compelling arguments, in which a decision is not easy to come by.

Sounds good.