What do you all think about this paper/article?

[Astrid]

Response predictable...

Have a great day.

Too risky to examine beliefs.
I understand.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Too risky to examine beliefs.
I understand.

Love your humour...

Still unwilling to state the source of your beliefs?

 

[OldAbramBrown]

That ... added?

Genesis alone describes three such.

Every nation experienced it differently which is the other reason the stories are different.

In many cases copies were used for firelighters or as railway track ballast.

 

[Astrid]

Genesis alone describes three such.

Every nation experienced it differently which is the other reason the stories are different.

In many cases copies were used for firelighters or as railway track ballast.

What does Genesis accurately describe?

 

[OldAbramBrown]

Gen 1 (minus first verse) is one.

The other two are combined in ch 6-7 (there are two sets of figures) but only one name, Noah, is given.

That's a hypothesis.

Over some thousands of years, lots of land reclamation efforts were achieved.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

... why are there 40 000 sects with different I terpretations? ...

because human beings are meant to have different interpretations

 

[Astrid]

because human beings are meant to have different interpretations

You don't know that, you just made it up.

And

They all claim God inspired them so, it's God telling
a lot of lies if so.

In court if you sue the neighbour for flooding your
property and ,i.ling all your animals, swear to it,
then change your story to say it didn't actually happen
but you wanted to teach your neighbour's lesson,
you are a perjorer, a liar.

A god told these guys the flood is every- word
literally true then told those guys it didn't happen and is just a cautionary tale?


Please explain.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

You don't know that, you just made it up ...

A god told these guys the flood is every- word
literally true then told those guys it didn't happen

1 - observation (human beings are individuals and are therefore meant to have viewpoints), and it's different from the case when compensation was needed
2 - you have mentioned a couple of hermeneutic positions (neither of which interests me) and I think you are a skeptic yourself? My purpose was in adding to perspectives of thread participants generally

 

[Astrid]

1 - observation (human beings are individuals and are therefore meant to have viewpoints), and it's different from the case when compensation was needed
2 - you have mentioned a couple of hermeneutic positions (neither of which interests me) and I think you are a skeptic yourself? My purpose was in adding to perspectives of thread participants generally

1. You offered an opinion as fact

2. If you have no interest in / perspective on the truth or falsity of the bible, why even talk about it?

From an atheist pov, its of interest that so much of the bible ranges between semi accurate and complate fantasy
that it's plain that. If there is a god, it's not that one.

What does interest you about it, if not that?

 

[Ophiolite]

My purpose was in adding to perspectives of thread participants generally

An honourable intention. Unfortunately you have merely confused this member as to what any of your posts in this thread actually mean. If that makes you uncomfortable then assume I have reading comprehension problems.