Why are Christians so incredibly gullible?

You just said Genesis could be allegory...not literal history.

 

The obvious Occam' Razor answer is....that's because the story of Abram was compiled centuries later than his life (AFTER the formation of Israel likely).... by the chroniclers, who wanted to include the idea that their "founder of the race" worshipped not just some "nameless god" but "Yahweh/Jehovah".

And of course the literalist won't accept that because it means the chroniclers added, subtracted, edited, and extrapolated on what they think were "totally and historically true versions of the events" of Genesis.

 

I wanted to revisit this comment.

1) As previously stated, we know that Abraham did not know the name of God as YHWH.

Editors putting the Bible together needed to connect the creation story to Moses. They knew there were problems in trying to create a picture of continuous monotheism because of the pagan past. Connecting the Sumerian God El to this newly created YHWH fellow was not going to be easy.

So they had to add statements such as "I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El-Shaddai--'God Almighty'--but I did not reveal my name, Yahweh, to them" Exodus 6:3

Even if we take the Bible as literal, Abraham had no clue as to the name of this God. He appeared to Abraham as the Almighty El. Chief God of the pantheon that Abraham and his father Terah worshiped -along with all of Terah's living ancestors at the time, including Noah and Shem. .

 

Of course you are left with "God did it". I can't think of any Christian who doubts that and you certainly don't have to be a creationist to believe it. Theistic Evolution will do just fine and it leaves you with a lot less questions bringing the Bible into undeserved disrespute. Sadly it's creationists who rob the Bible of credibility by pretending it's a science-book which it clearly was never meant to be.

So if you don’t want to go as far back as Augustine or even the Bible itself (for example 2 Peter 3:8 ) for better interpretations of Genesis, that are not contrary to what - thanks to humankind's God-given scientific brain - we know by now about God’s creation, check out these guys:

http://biologos.org/

 

The 'flood' and the 'pyramids' have no relationship.

I have no doubt that the flood as in the Bible did not happen. It can't in the way described. Whereas the Pyramids are a reality and we know they are a link between this life and the afterlife for Egyptian Pharaohs. For the religious in ancient times the gods dwelt mainly 'above' mankind, and in the sky. So why should the 'towers' not have been a reality.

Etemenanki? a Ziggurat in Babylon dedicated to Marduk.

 

And your post has no relationship to anything I said. Why address it to me?

 

Yes, it is.

 

Sure, it's a possibility... I consider it as plausible as the Earth being created last Thursday and all of my memories being falsified to make it seem like I've been alive a quarter of a center. So, I don't consider it very possible.

 

What's your point? It was not uncommon for people to live to very long. And so what if they all spoke the same langue it still does not change the fact that God confused there language and caused people to disperse accordingly; those who were able to understand each other dispersed in a groups.

 

Etemenanki is a reality. Built to the honour of the 'god' Marduk. Estimated at 90+ metres high. So why not towers built elsewhere to reach to the 'gods'. 'Babel' - taken from earlier 'myths'.
Pyramids are a reality/fact. Built for the reasons I explained. So why not towers?.
Man has always had a fascination with the heavens. Perhaps that's why we have so many skyscrapers reaching higher and higher.

Don't just discount things because they are in the Bible and you don't believe in the Bible. There are things in the Bible that are feasible, some things which are fact and some which are myth.

 

In Hong Kong its just because there is no room to go anywhere but up.

Yes and yes on the bible comments.

 

I'm not denying that there was a tall ziggurat, I'm denying the mythical Biblical story around it.

 

The point being that myths don’t tend to spring out of thin air but usually have a core of historical fact in them. Which is why, if you are an archaeologist/historian specialized on the Vikings for example, the Edda will interest you enormously.

 

Oh, yes, I know that, no argument here.

 

So you are using the Bible to provide proof the the veracity of the Bible?

Ha!

AboveAlpha

 

So you are saying that when people say that the sun rise or sets that they are saying that the Earth is the center?

 

What does that have to do with my question?

And where in the Bible does it say that?

And what signs might those be?

 

What does the name Jehovah mean?

 

yes of course, from Genesis to Revelation, it could be allegory, I just don't see it.

- - - Updated - - -

So when exactly did the add the statements that you claim to EX. 6:3?

 

I love Augustine, he's one of my favorites, that doesn't always make him correct.

So lets explore theistic evolution. When did God set up the primordial ooze and why?

 

Thank you for being a person of reason.

The problem I find is that some people of Faith will say just about anything in response to a person that presents cold hard facts to them that contradicts Biblical text.

I have no issue with a person of faith and they can believe what they might. But if I am having a discussion with them and they attempt to talk BULL S#!% to counter what I might be saying...I will confront their FANTASY with REALITY.

I have said this before...the Old Testament and the various stories within them are just that....STORIES! They are not facts and they certainly have no proof to back their veracity.

And such Biblical STORIES which were developed as a means to TEACH MORALITY...should NEVER EVER be taken literally. They are stories of value but they just are simply NOT TRUE.

AboveAlpha

 

So didn't conservative scholars date genesis older than Sumerian? Enuma Elish?

- - - Updated - - -

you asked why I believe, and I gave it to you.

 

Oh...you answered alright! LOL!

As I stated I respect your right to believe what you will.

That doesn't mean I agree with it nor do I see any logic in why you would see such things as...PROOF.

AboveAlpha

 

They date it based on "tradition", yes.