Religion

guillaumeb

(42,649 posts)

27. And I recognize that you are a Biblical literalist,

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 01:23 PM

Jan 2019

and one who refuses to admit the existence of metaphor in the Bible.

And you have your agenda, and your reasons for insisting on only a literal interpretation of the Bible.

So that makes your countless assertions in this group perfect illustrations of the no true Scotsman fallacy.

Thank you for the illustrations.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

207 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do the Quran and Bible Really Teach The Universe Was Created in 6 Days? [View all] guillaumeb Jan 2019 OP

That's one interpretation. trotsky Jan 2019 #1

But you get to define what an author "really meant"? guillaumeb Jan 2019 #2

Nope, I'm just saying that you don't either. trotsky Jan 2019 #3

Not only does Gil get to define it for them, he gets to define what you said Major Nikon Jan 2019 #16

Luckily his shtick has been exposed for everyone to see, long ago. trotsky Jan 2019 #165

Metaphorical or related readings lead to problems of their own. Bretton Garcia Jan 2019 #38

The earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God's six days don't add up John Fante Jan 2019 #4

And this article makes the point that the 6 days are a metaphor. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #6

No, the Bible is literally true - every word. bitterross Jan 2019 #29

Agreed. Some theists old that view, as do some non-theists here. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #31

Why don't you explain how to tell the difference Mariana Jan 2019 #46

So a verse by verse explanation? guillaumeb Jan 2019 #51

If it's so easy then do it Major Nikon Jan 2019 #56

If you feel that is a realistic request, that is your belief. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #58

No, that's your belief, Gil Major Nikon Jan 2019 #60

An explanation of the method you use, Gil. Mariana Jan 2019 #90

If it's completely ridiculous and makes no sense, then it's metaphorical Major Nikon Jan 2019 #171

The nice parts are literal, the nasty parts are not. marylandblue Jan 2019 #173

Some medieval theologian decided marylandblue Jan 2019 #48

More than one. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #52

Who said that, gil? Major Nikon Jan 2019 #59

Every amateur here says they think the story is non-literal marylandblue Jan 2019 #78

Exactly, most non-theists in this group believe the earth was created in 6 days Major Nikon Jan 2019 #55

What you claim is nonsensical. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #57

Well, since we are going for nuance here marylandblue Jan 2019 #85

The first argument postulating the big bang was made circa 1100AD. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #92

In 1100, that was not a scientific proposal marylandblue Jan 2019 #95

And you decided that this was not science? guillaumeb Jan 2019 #97

See number 98, but also marylandblue Jan 2019 #100

They are called fundamentalists, Gil Major Nikon Jan 2019 #61

And the point of this article is to present another view. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #63

You must have failed at math, Gil Major Nikon Jan 2019 #70

Your "logic" escapes me. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #73

You just got cold hard busted lying again, Gil. Deal with it. Major Nikon Jan 2019 #84

Damn, that's deplorable. n/t trotsky Jan 2019 #166

It gets even better Major Nikon Jan 2019 #172

You're still wrong because you're an evil uppity atheist who disagrees with him. trotsky Jan 2019 #181

Why can't we just sit back and accept our sermons like normal people? Major Nikon Jan 2019 #183

Come on Gil, he set up the whole equation for you Lordquinton Jan 2019 #89

Perhaps he doesn't have enough beads to divide that many Major Nikon Jan 2019 #101

He would need several million Lordquinton Jan 2019 #109

Foiled again... Major Nikon Jan 2019 #110

Curses! Lordquinton Jan 2019 #111

Perhaps you should start a new thread Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #117

The choir is in harmony. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #131

Insults again. trotsky Jan 2019 #170

Observation and analysis. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #176

Indeed. trotsky Jan 2019 #182

There is no "other view" when it comes to facts, gil. trotsky Jan 2019 #168

Jewish scholars have no trouble reconciling the Torah and the Big Bang Gothmog Jan 2019 #5

Thank you for the links. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #7

Who cares? nt TwistOneUp Jan 2019 #8

Why did you click on the post? guillaumeb Jan 2019 #9

The cosmology was laughable even in ancient Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #10

Another literalist? guillaumeb Jan 2019 #11

Nope. As I said biblical cosmology was Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #12

My reply stands. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #13

But no need for the metaphor turd paint, right Gil? Major Nikon Jan 2019 #15

#5 guillaumeb Jan 2019 #19

You didn't answer the question Major Nikon Jan 2019 #20

It seems many athiests demand the Bible be interpreted literally gtar100 Jan 2019 #39

I do as well. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #42

I'd like to know how theists determine which parts they take literally Mariana Jan 2019 #47

You're not going to get a uniform answer. gtar100 Jan 2019 #115

Uh no. The point is that mashing modern physics Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #118

That turd is gonna need a lot more coats Major Nikon Jan 2019 #14

Are there any English translations that use a different word? MarvinGardens Jan 2019 #17

I have no idea. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #18

One of the dozens of inaccuracies edhopper Jan 2019 #21

The Genesis story is just that. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #22

so why try to say edhopper Jan 2019 #62

I have called it a creation story before this. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #64

Didn't you also post a thread edhopper Jan 2019 #65

Yes I posted about how I see Genesis as not incompatible with the big bang and evolution. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #67

Almost all origin stories edhopper Jan 2019 #88

It was intended to be a religious text. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #134

Except this whole exercise of yours edhopper Jan 2019 #137

My intention is to show that neither text guillaumeb Jan 2019 #138

Is it anything more edhopper Jan 2019 #139

Genesis is Bronze Age. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #140

Based on the edhopper Jan 2019 #141

Muslims accept the OT and NT as the revealed word of God. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #144

So edhopper Jan 2019 #145

Inspiration. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #148

Collective unconcious? edhopper Jan 2019 #149

Perhaps not a collective unconcious, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #150

But God edhopper Jan 2019 #151

Part of life is learning. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #153

Without any way of knowing edhopper Jan 2019 #158

Do we ever know if we made the best choice? eom guillaumeb Jan 2019 #160

we can try edhopper Jan 2019 #161

Free will is meaningless if we are controlled by another. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #174

Free will edhopper Jan 2019 #177

But we understand it to mean that, in theory, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #178

The whole God wants us to have Free Will edhopper Jan 2019 #179

What is "evil"? guillaumeb Jan 2019 #184

Another edhopper Jan 2019 #185

Contained in a sentence. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #186

I don't know but it is evil as fork for a Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #187

Covering up predation is evil. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #188

For example by hiding behind "sanctity of the confession " Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #189

The issue is that Seal of the Confessional. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #192

It is also unlikely to be changed by the RCC. MineralMan Jan 2019 #193

Evidence, or the evidence that I have read about, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #194

Mandatory reporting is not about identifying predators before they act marylandblue Jan 2019 #195

The confessing anonymously explains one fatal weakness of the idea. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #197

Nobody said it was a "solution," since a that implies "problem solved" marylandblue Jan 2019 #199

And if predatory priests know this, and they will, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #200

Criminals confess to stuff all the time, even in public settings. marylandblue Jan 2019 #201

Some criminals do. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #202

"SOME criminals do"... "MOST predators do not" marylandblue Jan 2019 #203

Well this subthread is quite far from the actual topic. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #204

It is indeed. trotsky Jan 2019 #191

"Inspiration" could be and has been used to justify any and all narratives marylandblue Jan 2019 #169

here's the problem... qazplm135 Jan 2019 #130

To your last point: guillaumeb Jan 2019 #133

either the text is divinely inspired or it's simply man inspired qazplm135 Jan 2019 #135

Let us assume that it is divinely inspired. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #136

I literally told you qazplm135 Jan 2019 #142

The Bible is not a science book. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #146

God probably knows accurate science qazplm135 Jan 2019 #152

But to recognize the existence of God is not to BE God. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #154

then we are agreed qazplm135 Jan 2019 #155

The Bible is a collection of stories. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #156

the book written done by a woman was what again? qazplm135 Jan 2019 #157

I re-used electrons from other replies. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #159

What, didn't you just say the exact opposite? Lordquinton Jan 2019 #162

To be a part of means simply that. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #175

So you are intentionally contradicting yourself? Lordquinton Jan 2019 #196

No, you are misframing. eom guillaumeb Jan 2019 #198

You can't be serious Lordquinton Jan 2019 #205

I have that thought constantly in this Group. eom guillaumeb Jan 2019 #206

Probably when you're reviewing your posts Lordquinton Jan 2019 #207

Genesis 1:3-5 MineralMan Jan 2019 #23

If you had read the article, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #24

Actually, I did read the article, which was one person's MineralMan Jan 2019 #25

And I recognize that you are a Biblical literalist, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #27

Uh, no. I'm a Bible story-tellerist. MineralMan Jan 2019 #30

No, your own words reveal you as a literalist. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #32

Also Sprach Willy... MineralMan Jan 2019 #34

Ich spreche einige deutsch guillaumeb Jan 2019 #40

I speak very little German. I can be polite, ask directions, inquire as to MineralMan Jan 2019 #44

Speaking of politeness, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #45

Bill? Oy! Could never call you or refer to you as Bill. sprinkleeninow Jan 2019 #91

MM has his own way of showing things. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #96

Is Gill okay? I'm not sure what the 'u' does. marylandblue Jan 2019 #107

It is. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #113

Well, no; the article says nothing about that rather important 'evening and morning' construction muriel_volestrangler Jan 2019 #50

This: guillaumeb Jan 2019 #54

How did Augustine explain away the repeated 'evening and morning'? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2019 #75

From your source: guillaumeb Jan 2019 #77

Ha-ha! muriel_volestrangler Jan 2019 #83

I have always thought no one knows for sure just how long a biblical day is. appleannie1943 Jan 2019 #26

Literalists insist on a literal reading. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #28

Why would that be so? In our Solar system, MineralMan Jan 2019 #33

And, as the article points out, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #36

Campfire stories, Guy. MineralMan Jan 2019 #41

Comical is reading a demand for a strictly literal interpretation from guillaumeb Jan 2019 #43

Why did God need the Sun to tell time? marylandblue Jan 2019 #49

Diversion from the topic. eom guillaumeb Jan 2019 #53

No, it's a direct response to marylandblue Jan 2019 #66

Literalists see the "day" as a literal 24+ hour period. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #68

100% of atheists do not believe it ever happened. marylandblue Jan 2019 #69

One premise does not follow the other. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #71

Well that was a weirdly worded poll marylandblue Jan 2019 #72

Argue with the 8%. eom guillaumeb Jan 2019 #74

No point. I'm fine with the opinions of the 92%. marylandblue Jan 2019 #80

This percentage was proven false Lordquinton Jan 2019 #164

G-man was just being lazy Lordquinton Jan 2019 #163

That's not really true. VMA131Marine Jan 2019 #127

Yes. And the evening and the morning were still one day. MineralMan Jan 2019 #167

The big problem, then, is this PJMcK Jan 2019 #35

If you are asking for my view, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #37

You've suggested in the past that it's a metaphor for the Big Bang marylandblue Jan 2019 #86

See #5 guillaumeb Jan 2019 #93

If we start reading Genesis that way, it cease to be an actual metaphor marylandblue Jan 2019 #98

If one believes that the creation story is metaphor, guillaumeb Jan 2019 #99

Without the scientific method, there is no science marylandblue Jan 2019 #102

Rabbi Nahmanides guillaumeb Jan 2019 #103

Yes, because you don't understand how medieval Jewish literalism worked marylandblue Jan 2019 #104

This is speculation into the nature of existence. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #105

Not in as much specificity as traditional Judaism marylandblue Jan 2019 #108

Understood. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #114

Well, there's this. Turbineguy Jan 2019 #82

Because gravity and thermodynamics Turbineguy Jan 2019 #76

Newton invented gravity. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #79

Got it one! Turbineguy Jan 2019 #81

And why 6 days? If GOD is omnipotent Ferrets are Cool Jan 2019 #87

Metaphor. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #94

Fantasy. Ferrets are Cool Jan 2019 #106

Understood. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #112

So why are you so completely, dogmatically defensive Bretton Garcia Jan 2019 #116

This message was self-deleted by its author Act_of_Reparation Jan 2019 #125

Well obviously 6 days refers to Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #119

They obviously do. Act_of_Reparation Jan 2019 #120

Definer! Major Nikon Jan 2019 #121

Understood. Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #122

So the Bible is mistranslated. And misleading. Bretton Garcia Jan 2019 #123

Numerous times. MineralMan Jan 2019 #124

Does it really matter? Really? YOHABLO Jan 2019 #126

Seems to matter in this group, it comes up a lot marylandblue Jan 2019 #129

2peter:38 rampartc Jan 2019 #128

Agreed. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #132

whoever wrote genesis rampartc Jan 2019 #143

True. guillaumeb Jan 2019 #147

Doubtful. Act_of_Reparation Jan 2019 #180

So exactly what have you learned from Voltaire2 Jan 2019 #190