Dealing with ignorant people

[fr0d0]

No... I was being snide.

Ah ok. +1 to you then.

I don't dismiss anyone else's understanding at all.

Then why was the first thing you did not a defence of your position but an attack on my 'lack of understanding'?

That's the way you took it. I was generalising. I was specific about a foolish perspective which if it applies, you wear. It didn't have to imply 'you' or anything 'personal'.

I'm totally open to any opinion. It is fact that the bible's purpose is not to present literal facts about history. What _is_ it's intent is theology. Yeah, if you suggest something else I'm afraid I've gotta pull out the joker card. How can't I? If I started quoting Lassie the dog on particle physics I'd hope that you would call me a twat.

You haven't shown being open at all, every time i've seen you talking about, like in the chat box with Amorpha for example, you came up with the exact same dismissive excuses you always do by claiming that her conclusion required more background knowledge.

I merely piped in saying that for me it wouldn't be understandable without some background info (which I expanded on in reply to Amph's PM). This is info widely available from many sources all with differing explanations to help understand what is being said.. nothing secret or only obtainable if you believe first (I don't think that applies to the OT).

You don't have to cherry pick... absolutely everything in the bible is primarily allegorical. That there may be literal accuracy or not is completely irrelevant to the actual message.

Did Jesus rise from the dead or not?

If yes then BY WHICH STANDARD do you decide the validity of the supernatural claims? - I have asked you that question numerous times over the last few months and have not once received an answer.

Yes he did. But the physical proof of that event is irrelevant. The point of it is how it affects me and how I act on that. I believe it happened - I can't ever know.

So. The standard by which I decide the validity is separate from the historical event. It is primarily the logic rather than the historicity that motivates me to adopt the position of belief.

Good point. But where in the bible does God say that he exists/ I am? He didn't write he book, he inspired it.

Your stupidity actually hurts my brain...

Existence is simply not nothing, therefore If he exists there is a God and if not then there is no god. If you claim that he doesn't exist then by definition you believe in nothing...

To quote Rabbit:

"My take would be that it is not possible to give sufficient meaning to the word "god" and the sentence "god exists". The term “god” does not refer to an actual concept, and therefore to posit such a statement supposing that it does and that this referent exists in reality as something is an untrue positive declaration."

So the bible's stupidity hurts your brain. I actually appreciate the honesty of it. It does not falsely identify God and for this reason you call it stupid.