Karma reasons for concrete message

Message

Nam



    Posts: 12675
  • Darwins +333/-85


Either that makes you out to be an idiot, or you purposely do that to justify over things you may, personally, disagree with.

-Nam

Is it unfair to interpret (lol) "purposely...justify over" as deceit or hypocrisy.

I can see that you reject my premise when you don't think Jesus ever spoke anything in Mark. And so i don't think we will get anywhere with this. I actually admit that without the Bible I've got nothin else to back my beliefs on. So it's more like Scripture Proclaims About God

I gave the example of quarks having flavor as my proof that there is a place for symbolic communication in communicating otherwise literal, objective truth- especially when it's abstract. Spiritual matters are matters that are not physical/material and are by definition abstract.
But in either case, good symbolism adds to or enriches, as opposed to altering or mystifying, our understanding of something real, don't you think?


I don't believe Jesus spoke anywhere in the NT, at all because except for the NT, there's no evidence he existed at all. But that has nothing to do with why I object to your premise. I object to your premise because you hold only to your interpretation, not of whoever the author might be, and rest solely on your own; your OP presents your argument thusly.

This is your OP in a nutshell: I am right, everyone else is wrong.

One can identify this because you keep attempting to add "symbolism" to it. You know what a a synonym for "symbolism" is? Metaphor.

How can the Bible be metaphorical if it's all literal?

Good luck answering that without SPAG'ing or redefining to fit your viewpoint.

-Nam
Changed Change Reason Date
Disciple of Sagan Solid rebuttal May 29, 2014, 12:40:32 PM