[Winter wind]

Quote by: Morality games The only reason we treat the energy burst as though it happened is because there is evidence to prop up the idea. To be consistent in character and for the sake of logical cleanliness, it is fair to give every idea the same treatment. No idea deserves to be holy until it is proven to be holy.

Sure, but that's not proof God doesn't exist.

However, you are arguing for a deistic God, not the Christian God. Accounts of the Christian God's accomplishments contradict scientific evidence more directly.

That's what the next argument is. Lets just finish this one first.

The Bible also insists in other places the reverse mode of interpretation, a literal one, is the correct choice -- it is just differences in opinion amongst different writers living in different time periods. And no one who wrote those things ever once considered the matter in the same style as you, so why are you appealing to their words for authority? That is taking their statements out of context, which is senseless.

I don't think so. I mean, you can show the context of the use and prove me wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm right.

For Mark 2, Jesus was responding to pharisees. They were questioning why he was with sinners, why he was not fasting, and why he did not observe the Sabbath properly like the Bible said.

Mark 2:22 and Mark 2:27 were his responses. I don't think that was out of context.

The book of Hebrews was entirely a letter to the strict Jews. It also included the phrase "For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one.
But he finds fault with them and says: "Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah."

Hebrews 8:7-8

If you still think these phrases are out of context, please tell me how.

Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Wiccans, and others can make the same claim using the same double-standard logic, but it never accomplishes anything productive. It just obscures the issue, making it more insensible than it should be by including information irrevelant to the investigation.

This isn't really an argument, so it's hard to respond.

But I don't think we use a double-standard. We just add one extra fact that we just know is true. God exists. The logical foundation is built on that.

I know from experience it never firmly asserts the view that the Bible as a whole ought to be interpreted allegorically.

Please provide textual support for this statement.

Fables and parables are included in the text, and these are subject to such interpretations. But the Jews invested much effort into making Old Testament an authentic history, and nothing they wrote on that note was ever meant to be taken as anything other than the hard, accountable facts of the matter.

So you think the Jews were stoned when they wrote the genealogy? Do you really think they were sure that Adam lived 900+ years?