- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
You have done plenty of cherry picking :D
So you argument is now what? "I have found 4 webs that fits to my view?" If I post 10 articles about Genesis is being literal, will I win?.
I listed links because you made the ridiculous comment that ALL sources say that it is supposed to be interpreted literally.
Go ahead and find me ten links from non-creationists saying that the Bible should be interpreted literally.
Your previous "argument" that "different people, did wit different religions in different times something different..." looked that you in least try...
Can you retype that in English, please?
You have lost many argument ago.
Why? Because you say so?
You are not even arguing.
Well, I obviously am. What do you call this? You just can't prove anything, nor do you understand the topic, so you decided to go ahead and just declare that you won. That's fantastic.
All sources said that six days means six days.
ALL? That is probably the most ridiculous thing you have said so far... And you've said a lot of ridiculous things.
"In traditional jewish theology and in the early Christian church, it was not taught that the the creation story was an account of seven literal days. In fact, at that time most Christian and Jewish teachers felt that to entertain such a question was to miss the point of the Genesis account entirely."
"It was the common thought in the early church years that the story of creation had been separated into multiple days and a compounding sequence because there was a need for order to aid in its understanding. The proper interpretation of the creation story revolved around what was taught and symbolized, rather than battling between literal and allegorical canaille."
"It was't until the 1500s when the Protestant Reformation took place, that the emphasis for scripture interpretations became focused upon literacy. It was at this time that Martin Luther expounded the idea of earth being created in six literal days and God resting on a literal seventh"
Of course, you'll probably say that those people are full of shit, and are trying to make Genesis seem less stupid, in which case I would point out how you probably didn't read the quotes I listed. Show me an article that says Genesis must be interpreted literally from someone other than a Young-Earth creationist.
Just because you don't like it will not change.
What? Your opinion? Well, that sucks... But if you want to continue being stubborn and defending something you know nothing about, be my guest. If you are so confident that you are right, then you should be able to prove to me that it should be interpreted literally.
Outside of Genesis 1, yom plus a number (used 410 times) always indicates an ordinary day, i.e., a 24-hour period.
Do you realize how incredibly useless that argument is? People who interpret the Bible literally would consider all of the other passages to be literal, as well. You get all of your arguments from Young-Earth creationists, as if they are good authority on the subject. Give me a break! Maybe you should take a look at the other sides arguments, before you make up your mind.
The words “evening” and “morning” together (38 times) always indicate an ordinary day.
Show me those verses.
Yom + “evening” or “morning” (23 times) always indicates an ordinary day.
An argument they pulled from their ass. How do they know that the verses they are comparing them to are not allegorical, as well?
You shouldn't use that site as a source. I always suggest that people don't, because it is biased and flawed.
If you can't come up with your own arguments, with your own opinions, with your own "knowledge," then you should just quit and go make some more accounts (You are Helix, right?).
This is conclusive proof that have never attended science classes in your junior high.
Dude, where is the sun located at noon? Straight overhead, right? How about at 1:00? Our clocks are designed relative to the sun.
The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
You just copied and pasted that from the internet. You didn't even quote it, as if it is your own words. You don't even understand what you are defending. You may measure time differently, but most people, especially ancient Jews, don't... So, your argument is useless.
Why do you think that the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service is responsible for maintaining global time standards?
Which is a proof that Genesis was made up by primitives who did not know how stuff works.
They may not have known how the universe worked, but that doesn't discard the argument that Genesis chapter one is allegorical. You think that because some creationist said that Yom + a number + evening/day is referring to a literal 24 hour period, then it must be. Where do you think they got that idea from? They pulled it out of their ass. There is no Hebrew text, religious or not, that says that yom + a number + evening/day must be interpreted literally. The people who actually speak the language say that it isn't supposed to be interpreted literally... Do you speak Hebrew? Does Ken Ham speak Hebrew? No... So, your argument is based on other ignorant arguments.
Six days in for [YOM] [number] [DAY TIME] means just and only 24h day. End of story. Your opinion does not matter.,
You got that argument from creationist websites. Of course they are going to interpret it literally. The days can still be figurative, though... That is how an allegory works. Do I really need to explain to you what an allegory is?
Cut out of context
Oh, yeah? What did those verses really mean, then?
How do you know they were making it up?8
How do I know that they were fables? Because it is obvious. You refuse to do any research outside of biased creationist websites.
For us is Genesis complete bullcrap. However for those primitives who made up that story, six days looked realistic which is why they have used 624h day.
Then why didn't they consider them to be literal days?
There is literally nothing to be ignorant about. It is a simple story made up by primitives.
There you go... Ignorance.*
There is no reason to think that it is not literal, for them it looked real.
There are plenty of reasons. You could at least look up the shit yourself, since you choose to ignore what I have supplied.
There is no doubt that Genesis is meant to be literal. It is not random story it has exact order of creation, with timing and description how thins happen.
Alright, dude... Go ahead and keep thinking that.
You are the one who tries to twist words, cut stuff out of context...
I have cut nothing out of context. You just like to say that I did as if you've actually looked into it. You're just too stubborn to admit that you don't know shit.
I referred to the Torah since it was the one that contains the Genesis, the book where the moderator was referring to.
Yeah, I'm the moderator lol.
I believe that the Torah was not written by Moses alone
I agree. It might not have even been written by Moses at all. His infancy story is the same as the Mesopotamian king Sargon. I think the Jews picked up a lot of laws and legends during the Babylonian Exile.
He was attributed to the Torah because he was the Israelites` savior from Egypt which would probably explain his prominence in the chapters.
Well, the Bible made up a few characters, that's no secret. Job was one, and Paul said that the story of Abraham and his sons was an allegory, so those characters were most likely made up, as well. I'm sure Noah was made up, considering the resemblance to that story and the one in the Epic of Gilgamesh, another Babylonian fable. However, I don't think people are supposed to interpret most of the Bible literally, anyways.