It wasn't quite simply literal therefore, entirely. But it was literal in believing in a God. Just as other believers do.

They believe they believe, but if they actually believed, they'd be acting a lot differently than they do.

Understood. Your responses vary between gifs and ad hominem.

1) You duplicitously claimed I said at least half of the US adult population subscribes to YEC when in fact I said half of Christians.

2) You then used your deception to make a half-fast condescension of my abilities with basic math when I proved I was exactly correct.

3) You then once again engaged in condescension by claiming my "logic" is somehow deficient.

4) Now you are trying to gaslight everyone who reads any of this by pretending I didn't substantiate my claim.

So why do you feel the need to lie in order to try to humiliate me, Gil? And now that I think about it, this isn't just with me, it's pretty much all the prominent atheist posters in this group. So why do you hate atheists, Gil? What is it about us that frightens you so?

you would have been correct. But you said Christians.

So, once again, your claim is unsupported by the evidence.

Edited to add:

And even among Protestants, 45% accept evolution.

If you want to admit your fuckup and apologize for your condescension which resulted from it, I'm happy to go over the numbers with you again. But if you are going to continue with your duplicity, the most obvious explanation is it wasn't a fuckup at all and was instead a deliberate attempt at misrepresentation, or in other words a lie.

And statistics, actual facts, do not support your statement.

That is not my fault. I did not make you write that statement, unless you are saying that I somehow hijacked your account and wrote what was written.

As to your claim of misrepresentation, that is laughable.

1) You duplicitously claimed I said at least half of the US adult population subscribes to YEC when in fact I said half of Christians.

2) You then used your deception to make a half-fast condescension of my abilities with basic math when I proved I was exactly correct.

3) You then once again engaged in condescension by claiming my "logic" is somehow deficient.

4) Now you are trying to gaslight everyone who reads any of this by pretending I didn't substantiate my claim.

So why do you feel the need to lie in order to try to humiliate me, Gil? And now that I think about it, this isn't just with me, it's pretty much all the prominent atheist posters in this group. So why do you hate atheists, Gil? What is it about us that frightens you so?

For further reading, see...
http://gbntv.org/truth-about-lying/

You made a statement that you cannot substantiate. I am not saying that you are lying. I believe that you believed what you said.

And now you return to your meme that this is "atheist hating". No, it is simply demonstrating that you made a statement that was perhaps metaphorical. Yes, I will treat it as metaphorical.

1) You duplicitously claimed I said at least half of the US adult population subscribes to YEC when in fact I said half of Christians.

2) You then used your deception to make a half-fast condescension of my abilities with basic math when I proved I was exactly correct.

3) You then once again engaged in condescension by claiming my "logic" is somehow deficient.

4) Now you are trying to gaslight everyone who reads any of this by pretending I didn't substantiate my claim.

So why do you feel the need to lie in order to try to humiliate me, Gil? And now that I think about it, this isn't just with me, it's pretty much all the prominent atheist posters in this group. So why do you hate atheists, Gil? What is it about us that frightens you so?

Probably best that you aren't a literalist, Gil.

I prefer the penguin gif.

Here's where you lied and said I was talking about all Americans:

A mantra for us all.

What does that say?

and 290 views.

Or maybe you'd hoped others would agree that 120 million Americans who believe in YEC out of 240 Christians proves literalism isn't alive and well in the US.

Short for MM?

It is MM, after all, Will.

It sounds very much like a mantra.

So kinda strange when a theist comes to DU to hate on the atheists.

Then "hate on the atheists" meme?

Was it inspired by another prolific poster in this group?

Perhaps you could petition for a group dedicated to that. One where your posts about the evils of theism would not be challenged.

A reaction?

And are there more current numbers, say later than 5 years ago?

After giving so many sermons to others about that no less.

At least you are consistently inconsistent.

who have received credible death threats from Christians. Some those recipients of death threats have been children.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218270285#post1

Read that thread and you'll have no doubt about exactly where Gil stands on this. By the way, you will notice a distinct lack of theists on that thread expressing support for atheist recipients of death threats from Christians, or condemning the Christians who issue them.

It's not as if he hides it all that well. The only people he seems to care about are those he thinks have been wronged by any atheist, like Trump supporters.

But Theresa May is the Conservative PM anyway.

they believe in stuff they think is in the bible that backs up their prejudices.

But there are also the examples of progressive theists. Like the Reverend Barber, for one.

but not all?
Is this a all or nothing, or is there a spectrum of litteralists?
For instance, Is there any evidence that the story of the nativity is true, or is there loads of evidence it could not have happened as it says in the Bible?
Aren't those who say it is completely true litteralists?

Even the most hard core fundamentalists still leave themselves with a little wiggle room if you bother to read their doctrine. Very few Christians believe the world has 4 corners, insects have 4 legs, and pi = 3. Rather than take the literal road and look even more ridiculous than believing in 900 yr old people, they will simply say the bible does not say what it says, because obviously the bible can't be wrong.

It's also true that all of them take parts of it literally. The only difference is how much.

Probably in the sense that every believer might approach things differently.

take some part of the Bible litterally.

are in some part literalists.

And that He is the Son of the Creator.

Nativity as told in the Bible or his death and resurrection?

Are there Christians who don't believe in the resurrection?

Nor can I answer for others.

Jesus was literally resurrected as told in the Bible.
Doesn't that make them literallists in part?

If one assumes that Biblical literalism is an all or nothing position, all must be accepted as literally true.

But I accept much as metaphorical.

Think all parts of the Bible are literal?

Your diversion is noted.

Also, do you believe that anyone who believes that Genesis Chapter 1 could not possibly be referring in any sense to the big bang or evolution is a literalist according to your definition?

The idea that any atheist believes in any interpretation of the bible is nutty beyond belief.

It was never anything more than strawman gibberish to begin with. Gil has just repeated it enough times he managed to convince himself and probably doesn't even remember why he even came up with it.

Once again reafirming my conclusion that you are actively posting in bad faith.

As I have stated before, literalism is not bianary. People can be literal about all or part of the Bible.
There are old Earth Creationist, they are also literalist.
People who reject the Genesis story as literaly true, but then accept the Flood story or the Exodus story as accurate are also literalists.

Are you talking about all americans, or christians? The two are NOT interchangeable.

Both your surveys talk about a general population, not specific to the christian part, which is what the whole topic is about. The part about the UK is a strawman, as the discussion was about US christians.

This would be shredded in a debate class, since that's what your new meme seems to be about.

And Gil can't understand why anyone takes issue with people taking the bible literally.

Meanwhile pretty much constantly some group of morans thinks it's a good idea to teach that particular brand of ignorance in public schools and our tax dollars have to pay for both defending and challenging that nonsense.

One thing Gil did manage to reveal is that this is not a problem in Europe at all because they have a much smaller population of rock hard ignorant Christians.

We wouldn't be having any of these discussions.

His new meme of grading people as if it were a debate class is great, I'd love for it to be conducted in some formal form like that, he'd get a nasty surprise when he makes claims and backs them up with false evidence.

But yeah, the whole online debate class thing is more than a bit banal. With no moderator to call bullshit on an infinite number of formal fallacies and flat out lies, this ain't anything remotely close to debate class.

It isn't take the whole Bible literally or not a literalist at all.
Most believers take some part of the Bible literally.
Believing in the story of Jesus' death and resurrection as it is described in the Bible makes one a literalist.

In typical Gil fashion he came up with a different source that was talking about something different and even if it weren't meant it contradicted his first source. Someone got to stay after school for a lecture from his debate school teacher.

The data presented—how many Americans accept evolution—does not address the topic of the op, which is how many Americans take the Bible literally. Evolution only concerns itself with one part of the Bible. Joe Bob Christian might believe in evolution, but that doesn't mean he doesn't take literally any of the other demonstrably false shit the Bible has on offer.

for a similar wreck, it seems.

Can't we just say fictional and call it a day?

It's more accurate to say the bible is a work of plagiarism from earlier fictions.

The 38% number is the same number as Trumpy's approval rating.

Ooo... Could it be? Are we connecting dots???

Just playing.

Maybe you should consider that when bragging about just a little more than half US adults vaguely accepting "in some form" what has been scientific consensus for 160 years.

I'm not impressed.

In another 160 years we should be up there with the UK.