(December 9, 2011 at 10:32 am)Chuck Wrote: What you said is in effect "the fact that a story bears no relationship with reality does not negate its truth".No what I'm saying is that the reality of an event being true is based on a lot more inputs than 1. As observing the actual experience isn't an option due to a lack in time travel; I have to look for remnants of the effect from that cause to validate it. If you have any direct evidence for Abiogenesis it still wouldn't invalidate the event, unless it was taken literally. A figurative interpretation applies the why not the how.
I don't believe that humans have suffered the Fall because of the literal interpretation presented in Genesis. I believe humans suffered the fall because I see humans continuing to exhibit a propensity to reject God off the cuff and seek knowledge over faith and because trust the figurative interpretation of the Bible from personally applying it's lessons.
(December 9, 2011 at 4:35 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:(December 9, 2011 at 12:24 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I might be able to see if I understood how a metaphoric fall from grace would work. Can you help me out here?
I think he is pointing out the fact you are committing a composition fallacy. Just because there are allegedly aspects of Genesis that are figurative, does not necessitate that all parts of the story are indeed figurative (i.e. the fall).
yup, what he said
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
