Another look at the moon landing.

[Apple Sky]

You are using the word "true" too vaguely. Not literal does not equal not true. For example a proverb or a poem or a prophecy is frequently not literal, but it does not mean its false or a lie or anything like that.

And again, Bible is a library of various writings with various styles, genres, authors and purposes. One place can be literal, another place does not have to be. One place can be accurate, another place can be inaccurate. One place can be a mistake or an error, another place can be correct.

Okay, but why the doubts of Gen 1-6 ?

 

[JSRG]

Why are you folks wasting your time with Apple Sky? Those are minutes of your life you'll never get back. Find something to do that will actually matter.

There does seem to have been a decrease in interest in replying to them. Still, even if you won't convince Apple Sky, responding to the points may be of use to someone else reading the topic.

 

[trophy33]

Okay, but why the doubts of Gen 1-6 ?

Its not doubts, its understanding.

Three reasons - because these texts have obvious signs and style of mythological literature, because it was written in the culture that loved mythological literature and because we experimentally know the world is not a flat disc with a firmament.

In conclusion, both internal and external evidence agree these chapters are not literal or scientific.

 

[Apple Sky]

Three reasons - because these texts have obvious signs and style of mythological literature, because it was written in the culture that loved mythological literature

So what about the rest of the Old Testament, like Exodus, Isaiah ? Are these mythological also ?

 

[trophy33]

So what about the rest of the Old Testament, like Exodus, Isaiah ? Are these mythological also ?

Its possibly a mixture. Their authors did not separate these styles so anxiously as you do.

But its frequently difficult to determine what is history and what is myth or what is accurate and what is not, what is original and what is an addition, what is the right translation etc., if we do not have any way to do it. Regarding the flat earth of with the firmament, we have many ways to test them, though.

 

[Apple Sky]

But its frequently difficult to determine what is history and what is myth or what is accurate and what is not, what is original and what is an addition, what is the right translation etc., if we do not have any way to do it.

So in other words you are picking & choosing what is mythical & what is not.

 

[peaceful-forest]

Its not doubts, its understanding.

Three reasons - because these texts have obvious signs and style of mythological literature, because it was written in the culture that loved mythological literature and because we experimentally know the world is not a flat disc with a firmament.

In conclusion, both internal and external evidence agree these chapters are not literal or scientific.

If you do not interpret the creation account in Genesis as literal, then how exactly did it go down? Do you believe the Big Bang theory over what God said?

 

[trophy33]

So in other words you are picking & choosing what is mythical & what is not.

As I said, many times we have no way how to determine it. I.e. I am not picking, I am saying "we do not know".

With some obvious texts, we do know or have a good probability. With Genesis 1, for example, we have a certainty, because we fly to space routinely - there is no firmament and the Earth is not a flat disc.

 

[trophy33]

If you do not interpret the creation account in Genesis as literal, then how exactly did it go down?

Not sure what you mean by going down.

Do you believe the Big Bang theory over what God said?

The Big Bang is not an article of faith, so it has nothing to do with a religious believing. Until it works well enough, its accepted.

There is also no Christian creed saying we must believe the Bible we have today was said/dictated by God. Because everybody knows there is a huge amount of purely human work behind it. Therefore, you are creating a non-existing problem, a non-existing dilemma.

And even if it was dictated by God, God could still use a non-literal genre the original audience was used to, like mythos. For example Jesus was using a lot of parables. We use neither mythos, nor parables, today. Both are examples of styles a modern reader must get used to.

 

[Apple Sky]

As I said, many times we have no way how to determine it. I.e. I am not picking, I am saying "we do not know".

Like You, you don't know about Genesis 1-6.

With some obvious texts, we do know or have a good probability. With Genesis 1, for example, we have a certainty, because we fly to space routinely - there is no firmament,

Well I suppose, the book of Revelation, Daniel & Isaiah are also mythological.

King James Bible
And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

King James Bible
And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.

King James Bible
And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

 

[trophy33]

Like You, you don't know about Genesis 1-6.

I know about Genesis 1-6. Its not a literal history, such genre did not even exist back then. It may refer to some real places or events, but it will be mixed with various traditions, interpretations and presented frequently in a symbolic manner.

As I already said to you, they did not separate literal from non-literal like we do today, they mixed it together.

Well I suppose, the book of Revelation, Daniel & Isaiah are also mythological.

These also use mythological and other non-literal, symbolic elements, yes.

P.S.:
The flat earth, the firmament and similar are not exactly mythological. These are just mistakes, misconceptions of the ancient people (similar to their misconceptions about anatomy, botany and other scientific fields).

Leviathan, Rahab, a talking serpent, a woman from the half of the man, creation from waters in 6 cycles and resting on the 7th... these are mythological.

 

[kiwimac]

Rob Skiba was a flat earther; he would not have been objective, he had an agenda.
Rob Skiba, it seems, spoke out strongly against the Covid vaccine. He died from Covid.

jood

 

[Apple Sky]

Leviathan, Rahab, a talking serpent, a woman from the half of man, creation from waters in 6 cycles and resting on the 7th... these are mythological.

What about the talking donkey ?

 

[Apple Sky]

jood

No such word.

 

[trophy33]

What about the talking donkey ?

Donkeys do not have any traditional mythological meaning, also the context of the event does not seem mythological.

 

[Apple Sky]

Operation Fishbowl was a series of high-altitude nuclear tests in 1962 that were carried out by the United States as a part of the larger Operation Dominic nuclear test program

Dominic meaning 'of the Lord'. I'll let you guys work it out what they were doing.

Is Hillary referring to Operation Fish Bowl/operation Dominic ?

 

[trophy33]

Operation Fishbowl was a series of high-altitude nuclear tests in 1962 that were carried out by the United States as a part of the larger Operation Dominic nuclear test program

Dominic meaning 'of the Lord'. I'll let you guys work it out what they were doing.

The quote already says what they were doing - high altitude nuclear tests.

Is Hillary referring to Operation Fish Bowl/operation Dominic ?

No.

 

[Apple Sky]

The quote already says what they were doing - high altitude nuclear tests.

How high tho, that is the question ?

 

[trophy33]

How high tho, that is the question ?

No, its not the question. The altitude of those tests is also on the wiki you quoted.

 

[Apple Sky]

No, its not the question. The altitude of those tests is also on the wiki you quoted.

So they say,