Atheist Bible Study 1: Genesis

[donlor]

Let’s get down & dirty - this post is hysterical - how arrogant this is - these specialists - are they controverted? - are these statements just there to “prove” validity - this is comedy in the extreme - dumb is often as dumb is said - am I having fun?

This is a common ploy that many fall for. The vital question is always this - what does primarily Biblical evidence & subsequently secondary evidence show - do you have any intelligible answer to this? These are not far-fetched questions or expectations to have an answer for.

[The Grand Nudger]

The vital question is always this - what does primarily Biblical evidence & subsequently secondary evidence show

It shows the polar opposite of the things you indicated belief in. Brutal, inconvenient, but true....not that it has to matter, lol.

[donlor]

The vital question is always this - what does primarily Biblical evidence & subsequently secondary evidence show

It shows the polar opposite of the things you indicated belief in.  Brutal, inconvenient, but true....not that it has to matter, lol.

you may lol because you have nothing to say - what is your point to be made - the burden of proof is on you
donals

[Bucky Ball]

[donlor]

re  Post 534  
There are two types of science - observational & historical. Observational science has to do with more of what can be tested. Historical science can be much more tenuous. Most, but not all of it, is based upon testimonies. “History” has validity where & to the measure it is supported & validated by others. It relies on the testimonies of those who speak of the issue at hand. Is this correct? 
How am I to deal with the works of Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, etc? Do I take them at face value & contend with them accordingly - or do I just dismiss them as being irrelevant because they are “history”?
As I understand you, I am but one of those “uneducated ignorant American Fundamentalism.” type people. All I can do is but thank you for sharing your great wisdom & insights with me. It is touching that you care so much!
Now, about “The editors/redactors/assemblers of ancient texts...” how can you make any assertions about them? Were you there? How do you know what they did or did not do? Your statement seems just a tad bit presumptuous to me - but I hope that you will excuse my errors as I am just uneducated.
If “Reading ancient literature as "history" is nothing but uneducated ignorant American Fundamentalism” why do you even bother to speak of  Babylonian mythology? Oh, just to educate me - I get it now, thanks.
The following is from answers in genesis - “Dr. Duane Gish, in Dinosaurs by Design, says there are more than 270 stories from different cultures around the world about a devastating flood. This chart shows the similarities that several myths have with the Genesis account of Noah’s Flood. Although there are varying degrees of accuracy, these legends and stories all contain similarities to aspects of the same historical event—Noah’s Flood.”

AMAZING - you state “DNA refutes the Adam and Noah stories,...” but here again I beg your indulgence to my ignorance. I was under the obviously misguided conception theat the genome project had come to the conclusion that all of mankind CAN be traced genetically to one original set of humans.  

“Claim 5: The high degree of human genetic diversity refutes Adam and Eve as the initial parents of humanity. - What does the evidence say? The jury is still out on this one, but serious questions have been raised against Venema’s arguments. Geneticist Richard Buggs evaluated Venema’s arguments and found that they don’t necessarily rule out the possibility that humanity arose from a single pair. Moreover, when Buggs courteously but reasonably requested that Venema provide a scientific citation for his claim that humans evolved from an ancestral population of ~10,000 individuals rather than a short, sharp bottleneck of two parents (Adam and Eve), Venema was unable to provide such a citation, seriously undermining his arguments on this point. Biologist Ann Gauger looked at one of the initially strongest arguments against Adam and Eve from human genetic diversity (HLA genes) and found the evidence is compatible with our descending from an initial couple. ID proponents are actively working on population genetics models and simulations to test these questions. Venema’s suggestions that ID proponents are incompetent or unable to evaluate this evidence are simply false. Two peer-reviewed papers and a book chapter have already been published in the ID-community related to modeling these questions, and early evidence suggests that an initial pair is capable of explaining human genetic diversity. More work is forthcoming, but Venema’s conclusions about Adam and Eve are premature.”

“Claim 8: Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam probably weren’t an actual couple. - What does the evidence say? The evidence suggests that all humans trace back to a single female and a single male ancestor. Whether the molecular clock evidence suggests these two individuals lived at the same time is another question, although some Darwin skeptics (such as Reasons to Believe) argue that they could have lived contemporaneously. Whether molecular clock data is trustworthy enough to make a precise estimate on these issues is still another matter. For more details, please see “Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam, and Adam and the Genome.”

What would we expect to find from the Genesis account of the flood - layers of sedimentary rock with many fossils in them all over the earth.
What do we find on earth -  layers of sedimentary rock with many fossils in them all over the earth. Am I missing something?

Lastly, “It appears that "Perhaps we both could learn from each other" was a dishonest LIE.
He came to shove his ignorance down our throats.”
Actually, I was hoping to find some good arguments to contend with. That this has yet not come to be is not my fault. There was no lie or duplicity on my part.

[The Grand Nudger]

It shows the polar opposite of the things you indicated belief in.  Brutal, inconvenient, but true....not that it has to matter, lol.

you may lol because you have nothing to say - what is your point to be made - the burden of proof is on you
donals

I'm not sure why you would think that.  You've indicated that you believe that genesis is literally true.  You've made a counterfactual claim on reality.  You appear to have done so because genesis is theologically important for you (and, you contest, all of christianity), and are unable to separate the theologically important details from the literary setting of the narrative.

The theological message, as you've noted, at least for christians......is that redemption is necessary because of sin.  The cross is just more symbolism - we don't actually need a cross.  Aside from being a counterfactual non-account of the world and ourselves..this isn't at all what the story was written as or intended to be.  Your christian notion of a sacrificial demigod is anathema to the culture expressed in the narrative. Nothing could have been further from the minds of those who authored it..than your hellenic paganism...lol.

Your views, and your views about their book..are mis-informed ...and... heretical.

[Bucky Ball]

[The Grand Nudger]

Ah..but Bucky, once you've invoked magic..it serves as a catchall excuse for anything...including how and why a planet destroying bomb of a thunderstorm didn't..you know..destroy the planet.

I'll offer to work out the numbers for our resident book enthusiast if he feels as though disagreeing with his literally true magic book is the way to go, positing a local flood instead. All he needs to do is pick a point on the map. The water holding capacity of the underlying geology and height of the nearest contiguous water containing ridge will be known quantities...though I can say with certainty that pretty much every single point picked will fall to alluvial drainage, lol.

I guess he's gotta go find himself a really...really big bowl?

[Drich]

Ah..but Bucky, once you've invoked magic..it serves as a catchall excuse for anything...including how and why a planet destroying bomb of a thunderstorm didn't..you know..destroy the planet.

I'll offer to work out the numbers for our resident book enthusiast if he feels as though disagreeing with his literally true magic book is the way to go, positing a local flood instead.  All he needs to do is pick a point on the map.  The water holding capacity of the underlying geology and height of the nearest contiguous water containing ridge will be known quantities...though I can say with certainty that pretty much every single point picked will fall to alluvial drainage, lol.

I guess he's gotta go find himself a really...really big bowl?

what a load of bologna thing to say. Buckster pour an hour or more into his post and you can't even be bother to respond to it topically... just a sweeping dismissal from the cheap seaats..

BOOOOOOOO! HISSSS Reset and try again

[The Grand Nudger]

Ah..but Bucky, once you've invoked magic..it serves as a catchall excuse for anything...including how and why a planet destroying bomb of a thunderstorm didn't..you know..destroy the planet.

I'll offer to work out the numbers for our resident book enthusiast if he feels as though disagreeing with his literally true magic book is the way to go, positing a local flood instead.  All he needs to do is pick a point on the map.  The water holding capacity of the underlying geology and height of the nearest contiguous water containing ridge will be known quantities...though I can say with certainty that pretty much every single point picked will fall to alluvial drainage, lol.

I guess he's gotta go find himself a really...really big bowl?

what a load of bologna thing to say. Buckster pour an hour or more into his post and you can't even be bother to respond to it topically... just a sweeping dismissal from the cheap seaats..

BOOOOOOOO! HISSSS Reset and try again

Not my fault that the deluge is so stupidly false, now is it?  I can't remember..are you also suffering under the peculiar affliction of believing that a planet destroying bomb of a thunderstorm magically failed to destroy the planet? Or are you in the camp that asserts that the literally true magic book is wrong about that, and it was regional..and could you by chance point to a map...or...?