Biblical literalists

[LittleNipper]

But you're avoiding the question. The bible does not say the snake will eat flesh, it says it will eat dust. Not flesh, dust. Anything else you read into that are your own interpritation, much like others interprite "days" to mean lengths of time longer than 24 hours.

For dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return. I'm certainly not making anything up. You are avoiding the sound logic.

Little boy to his mother, "My Sunday school teacher says that GOD made us from the dust of the ground. "

Mother to her son, "That's what the Bible says, dear."

Little boy responds, "Well someone is either coming or going under my bed."

 

[Dracil]

There's no such thing as hamburgers. They're dustburgers.

Couldn't find the bodies of the dead people who died in the car crash? Of course not, they're dust.

 

[LogicChristian]

For dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return. I'm certainly not making anything up. You are avoiding the sound logic.

Little boy to his mother, "My Sunday school teacher says that GOD made us from the dust of the ground. "

Mother to her son, "That's what the Bible says, dear."

Little boy responds, "Well someone is either coming or going under my bed."

Even if we came from dust that doesn't mean dust and flesh are the same thing.

That's why you can't win an argument with a creationist. If you beat them on their own logic, they'll redefine whatever word is necessary in order to create a new, self serving, logical construct.

Hey Nipper, could you give me your own definition of dust?

 

[nvxplorer]

I believe that they became as such after the fall. I believe Satan and his co-angles were manipulating the genetic code of animals. It seems that Satan was certainly trying to change man... Genesis 6:2 My feeling is that without the FLOOD the Messanic line (the human race itself) would have been totally destroyed. The angels that participated in interbreeding are held to this day in chains for judgment Once Israel was established, Satan continually tried to destroy that nation. Satan is still trying to destroy that nation because there still prophecy to be fufilled.

Wow! For a biblical literalist, your post reads like fantasy. Let’s start with Satan. In the OT, Satan is mentioned in 1 Chronicles, Job, Psalms and Zechariah. Satan appears nowhere in Genesis. I must ask. What is your definition of literalism?

Where can I find verse which indicates angels interbreeding? Interbreeding with whom? Aren’t angels spiritual beings? How can a spirit breed? What are your literal definitions of spirit and breed?

 

[YellowStar]

Snakes do eat dust!

by Carl Wieland

In Genesis 3:14 we read, ‘And the Lord God said unto the serpent… “upon your belly you shall go, and shall eat dust all the days of your life”.’ Since snakes do not really appear to eat dust, this has been taken as an example of either obvious metaphor (which seems reasonable) or an example of the Bible’s propensity to error, depending upon one’s bias.

In Micah 7:17 we read, ‘(The nations) shall lick the dust like a serpent’.

Once again we have the situation where, as more information has come to light, the Bible has been shown to be not only accurate, but accurate in minute detail. Snakes do deliberately and purposely eat and lick dust.

There is an organ in the roof of a snake’s mouth called ‘Jacobson’s organ’. This helps the snake to smell in addition to its nose. Its darting, forked tongue samples bits of dust by picking them up on the points of the fork, which it then presents to its matching pair of sensory organs inside its mouth. Once it has ‘smelt’ them in this way, the tongue must be cleaned so the process can be repeated immediately.

Therefore serpents really do lick dust and eat it.

 

[nvxplorer]

Snakes do eat dust!

by Carl Wieland

In Genesis 3:14 we read, ‘And the Lord God said unto the serpent… “upon your belly you shall go, and shall eat dust all the days of your life”.’ Since snakes do not really appear to eat dust, this has been taken as an example of either obvious metaphor (which seems reasonable) or an example of the Bible’s propensity to error, depending upon one’s bias.

In Micah 7:17 we read, ‘(The nations) shall lick the dust like a serpent’.

Once again we have the situation where, as more information has come to light, the Bible has been shown to be not only accurate, but accurate in minute detail. Snakes do deliberately and purposely eat and lick dust.

There is an organ in the roof of a snake’s mouth called ‘Jacobson’s organ’. This helps the snake to smell in addition to its nose. Its darting, forked tongue samples bits of dust by picking them up on the points of the fork, which it then presents to its matching pair of sensory organs inside its mouth. Once it has ‘smelt’ them in this way, the tongue must be cleaned so the process can be repeated immediately.

Therefore serpents really do lick dust and eat it.

Nice try, but this is quite a stretch. The snake’s tongue is sampling airborn chemicals, not dust per se. It’s also an exaggeration to say the snake is eating these chemicals. Moreover, there is dust everywhere. Nearly every creature inhales and consumes dust. That being the case, Wieland’s explanation can be extended to most species, thus rendering the explanation meaningless. I think his suggestion that the verse is obvious metaphor is correct.

 

[BananaSlug]

Last time I looked at a dead animal, it was mush. Dust only happens in extremely arid environments. Does anyone realize that there had to be a second creation for God to give predators their attributes to live on a high animal protein diet? He also had to create diseases, decomposers, and the like. I guess he either had to do two separate creations, or he created vegetarians with meat eating specializations because he knew they would have to eat meat because he knew the fall would happen.

 

[nvxplorer]

Last time I looked at a dead animal, it was mush. Dust only happens in extremely arid environments. Does anyone realize that there had to be a second creation for God to give predators their attributes to live on a high animal protein diet? He also had to create diseases, decomposers, and the like. I guess he either had to do two separate creations, or he created vegetarians with meat eating specializations because he knew they would have to eat meat because he knew the fall would happen.

Haven’t you heard? Before the fall, t-rex used his tiny front legs to grab pumpkin sized fruit.

 

[Vermithrax]

I believe Satan and his co-angles were manipulating the genetic code of animals.

Beware the dreaded right-angle.

 

[nvxplorer]

Beware the dreaded right-angle.

Satan must be a wrong-angle.

 

[ChrisS]

I believe that they became as such after the fall. I believe Satan and his co-angles were manipulating the genetic code of animals. It seems that Satan was certainly trying to change man... Genesis 6:2 My feeling is that without the FLOOD the Messanic line (the human race itself) would have been totally destroyed. The angels that participated in interbreeding are held to this day in chains for judgment Once Israel was established, Satan continually tried to destroy that nation. Satan is still trying to destroy that nation because there still prophecy to be fufilled.

Not very biblical today are we .

Meh, I would challenge the belief in satan/demonic existence, but I'm not sure I should change the discussion of the topic.

 

[Phred]

Great... I bought a Dyson because I wanted to be sure I got all the dust, turns out the thing's been sucking up meat all this time.

 

[Femto]

You missed the point; it is clearly a metaphore, I never said it wasn't. My question was for people who interprit "six days" as having no other possible meaning besides six days, why can other passages have non-literal meanings.

Because the Bible makes it clear when God is speaking in a Metaphors.

 

[Edx]

Because the Bible makes it clear when God is speaking in a Metaphors.

Sure, its so "clear" no one is in any doubt as to what the original author intended.... riiiight.

 

[z3ro]

Because the Bible makes it clear when God is speaking in a Metaphors.

Not always(hell, not even often) but of all the books genesis is certainly the most metaphorical(or rather, it makes the most sense when taken metaphorically).

 

[LittleNipper]

Not very biblical today are we .

Meh, I would challenge the belief in satan/demonic existence, but I'm not sure I should change the discussion of the topic.

IF I challenged the belief of Satan and demonic existence, I would not be pointing a finger at someone else and suggesting that the individual was not biblical.

 

[TheBigAl]

IF I challenged the belief of Satan and demonic existence, I would not be pointing a finger at someone else and suggesting that the individual was not biblical.

Hey Nip, have you become a "hit and run" creationist? (as you seem to post nonsense and runaway scared)

 

[ChrisS]

IF I challenged the belief of Satan and demonic existence, I would not be pointing a finger at someone else and suggesting that the individual was not biblical.

I simply read the bible differently then you. Thus I can't see how you can take demons/satan as reality.

 

[nvxplorer]

IF I challenged the belief of Satan and demonic existence, I would not be pointing a finger at someone else and suggesting that the individual was not biblical.

Considering that Satan is originally a Hebrew belief, and that the Jewish belief differs greatly from your interpretation, the finger is pointed directly at you as being a non-literalist.

 

[MethodMan]

Somehow, I doubt you're going to get a straight answer from a literal interpreter on this one.

How does the snake make a hole in the ground?