> But, Jim,
> This debate is not over symbolism. I have no argument with you
> there. This debate is over whether or not The Founding Fathers
> recognized God in the Constitution. I advise you to read the
> Federalist Papers link on that site I gave you to get a better
> understanding of what the Founders were trying to establish and
> what they actually thought.
I haven't read them, but it seems so simple: put it in the Constitution if they felt it really necessary. There were laywers amongst them. Thus, I would have to conclude that god is not in the constitution for a reason (not an oversight as that could have been fixed later??).
> I agree that the Bible contains much symbolism and "figure of
> speech." If you read my posts you will see I promote the
> symbolism in the Bible.
> But to state that the Bible is completely symbolic is just as
> frivilous as those who profess that the Bible should be taken
> in complete literal terms.
A creation story HAS to be 100% symbolic as there were no fully-grown humans present as a witness. THAT'S the whole point of mythical creation stories. Not all of the bible is 100% symbolic, but those passages that non-theists can't believe in a literal sense, "are" symbolic.
> The Bible is a combination of literal historical events and
> symbolic and archetypal meanings. There are astrological and
> astronomical symbols as well as "figures of speech" with
> literal under and overtones. But to say that the people or
> events did not take place is to also ignore the historical and
> archaeological records of Ancient Egypt which are the same
> records as the first half of the Bible.
The Exodus never took place. No arch. evidence will ever be found (as 1 example). The Hebrew writers introduced the concept of an "interactive god". Additionally, they were creating their OWN history (i.e. the bible is ultimately a political book).
(the names have been
> changed, but it is the record of the same people)
> History becomes legend, legend becomes myth,
Legend and myth need not have any historicity to still be legend and myth.
then all together
> forgotten. When they are rediscovered, they are oftentimes hard
> to believe. But that doesn't mean they did not take place. So
> Moses faced "glowed". Are you denying the possibility of a
> "supernatural" event?
Yes and no. Since we see similar, consistent descriptions elsewhere, the questions begs, IS there a "natural" explanation for these events.
Semi-obviously, my take is that there really is no god since he's been dormant for 2000 years and hasn't let us later humans see the same level of "miracle" that others got to see. IOW, if the events DID happen as they say, the apostles get to use less faith in believing Jesus than those of us born 2000 years later.
Then you deny all things in nature that
No, I don't deny nature where things glow like meteorites, the moon, sun, etc.
His face "shone" because he was exposed to something
> "supernatural" (that is, that which is beyond our understanding
> of natural). Why is this so hard to believe for you?
That's the literal take. The symbolic take (the REASON for the writing in the first place) is that Moses was a meteorite. Remember, Moses face glows after ASCENDING the mount. The descent and ascent motifs are all over the place in religion (Greece, et. al.). Thus, the fact that Moses face glowed in conjunction with the fact that it occurred up on the mountain (the primordial piece of land per the ancient Egyptians belief), leads me to believe it was a symbolic event/meaning.
> Did meteors fall to the earth back then? Of course they did.
> Look at the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Natural events did
> take place, albeit, with the help of a Supreme Advanced Being
> whom we call God.
Why must a supreme being be responsible for these events? If that's the case then the greek religion seems far more robust in "gods"/deities than the bible.
And the stories in the Bible are the records
> of these events.
Biased records at best. History has a way like that.
I don't believe the earth was created in a
> literal six days. In six ages, maybe, but not six days.
Why is god separate from creation?
> You are free as always to believe what you want.
Yes, but I'm in the minority here in the U.S. Other countries, different story.
> kind regards,