sonofone

I suppose I could ask the moderator to split this post once more since we have ended back where this post began,discussing inerrancy of scripture.We seemed to have lost this topic of Discussing Adam &Eve shortly after my post describing what happened here.

I guess it's like I said when I first posed this question in the inerrancy post,it's goes hand in hand

Johnny Skeptic

What you need to do is to provide credible historical evidence that the story of Adam and Eve is true. Otherwise, what good is it to discuss the story?

After you have finished with this thread, then you will still have the task of reasonably proving that God is a moral being, assuming that a God exists. That issue would be best discussed at the GRD Forum or at the MF&P Forum.

sonofone

Then I guess I'm off to that forum.Thanks

Amaleq13

The topic died after the staunch defender of the fable fled the field rather than admit defeat.

Joan of Bark

We can discuss the allegorical meaning of the story, as a way of understanding the beliefs of those who wrote it.

sonofone

There was no defeat to speak of.The topic was intended to cover the story of Adam and Eve's disobedience in relation to them having no knowledge of good and evil.I never set out to prove that Adam and Eve existed as stated in the story.

The post seemed to be going fine as long as everyone was having a crack at Ruchtin.Once I interjected and answered my own question,then the post derailed in my opinion.

So at that point it was officially over for me.

Matt Stone

First, the debate about Adam and Eve only really matters if they ever existed, which there is absolutely no evidence to support.

Second, the inerrant nature of scripture only really matters if god ever existed as something other than a human construct, which there is absolutely no evidence to support.

Third and finally, the inerrancy of scripture (be it christian or otherwise) is intimately tied to any claims to validity or literal interpretation used by any religious. If the scripture itself cannot be proven to be the true and literal word of god, or at least those parts not literal in intent but allegorical/metaphorical/etc. cannot be identified as such, then any interpretations of said scripture cannot be claimed as valid.

Done and done. Anyone adhering to such beliefs indulges in ongoing self-delusion and intellectual hypocrisy. Engaging such beliefs is analogous to taking an aspirin to cure cancer, despite all the proof that such a remedy will not be forthcoming.

Johnny Skeptic

What did you hope to gain from debating a nonverifiable, probably false story?

sonofone

Do you really want to know or are we just being rhetorical.:grin:

Johnny Skeptic

I really want to know.