It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
I know what a metaphor is. I'm arguing that the Genesis account is a metaphor too (given that the literal interpretation is complete scientific nonsense) and that you're cherry picking what you consider a metaphor and what isn't if you accept the Genesis account as truth
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
So let me get this straight. You're arguing that the Genesis account is a metaphor. Since when can you call a metaphor fiction? Metaphors always require the use of interpretation and therefore cannot be considered fiction based upon ones own interpretation. You're interpretation can be inaccurate, but that does't make the statement/metaphor itself inaccurate.
You're arguing for something that was never even brought up. No one here said that the Genesis account requires literal translation. It all started when I said "The light came into the world and the darkness did not comprehend it." That statement is not even from Genesis. Yet somehow you still managed to refute a metaphor...
How silly is that? "I disagree with your metaphor!"
Please...gimme a break. Just because I'm a Christian does not mean you have to argue with me over each and every little thing. We're both humans therefore we both have the right to our own opinions. (Now don't go saying "Yes, but don't force your opinion on me" because I didn't force anything on anybody. Just look who started the thread....it most certainly wasn't me.)
As do I have the right to point out that your opinion is completely illogical and based in a tremendous bias.
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
As do I have the right to point out that your opinion is completely illogical and based in a tremendous bias.
Then all that is left is for the readers to make up their own minds. Stop trying so hard to influence people and keep them from believing in a belief system of their choice.
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by idonotcollectstamps
Science and belief in God are not mutually exclusive mind you.
So what you're doing by "poking holes in your own life preserver" is the same as "digging your own grave". You're burying yourself deeper and deeper under a mound of lies that you keep feeding yourself in order to maintain a wee bit of pride.
Nobody ever wants to admit "Yes God, I'm helpless without you.
Yes God, I am not as smart as I think.
Yes God, you do exist and I'm tired of running from you."
It's pride that keeps you from accepting God....not knowledge...not science...not whatever excuse you throw out...it's pure and simple pride.
When I think pride I think...."Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it."
I doubt you understand what it means to lose your life to God though. It's a difficult concept to grasp, especially if you're not willing.
Science and belief in God are not mutually exclusive mind you.
So what you're doing by "poking holes in your own life preserver" is the same as "digging your own grave". You're burying yourself deeper and deeper under a mound of lies that you keep feeding yourself in order to maintain a wee bit of pride.
Nobody ever wants to admit "Yes God, I'm helpless without you. Yes God, I am not as smart as I think. Yes God, you do exist and I'm tired of running from you." It's pride that keeps you from accepting God....not knowledge...not science...not whatever excuse you throw out...it's pure and simple pride.
When I think pride I think...."Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it."
I doubt you understand what it means to lose your life to God though. It's a difficult concept to grasp, especially if you're not willing.
I know God's Word.
I know His Spirit.
I have felt His presence.
I have heard His Word.
I have seen His work.
I can learn from His Word.
His work is demonstrable.
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by MrXYZ
The difference is, I do have evidence of God whereas I do not have any evidence supportig unicorns.
I know God's Word.
I know His Spirit.
I have felt His presence.
I have heard His Word.
I have seen His work.
I can learn from His Word.
His work is demonstrable.
My life is a testimony to His work.
Elizabeth Sanders' life is a testimony to His work.
This young lady is a testimony to His work.
This lady as well and this
and this
and even this
“The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world”
Not only this, but the evidence is within us as well.
Deep within us is the recognition that there is something beyond this life and someone beyond this world.
Deny it intellectually all you want, but the evidence is still all around.
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by uva3021
I think that the probability of there being a God is much larger than the existence of a unicorn.
God is a name we humans have given a source, don't forget that.
A unicorn is the name we humans have given a animal with a magical horn.
You don't believe in magical animals do you, so why do you think its more likely that a unicorn exists?
It doesn't make sense.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by spy66
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by uva3021
I think that the probability of there being a God is much larger than the existence of a unicorn.
...well, you're wrong.
God is a name we humans have given a source, don't forget that.
...no, "God" is a specific idea. Deities aren't some abstract 'source', they're something more than that.
A unicorn is the name we humans have given a animal with a magical horn.
...and that animal with a magical horn is far less complex and wouldn't be a radical departure from what we know about the universe.
You don't believe in magical animals do you, so why do you think its more likely that a unicorn exists?
It doesn't make sense.
More likely doesn't mean that we believe they exist. Which is more likely, a 25 foot tiger or a 1000 foot tiger?