Indeed it is, if you understand Jesus as the human avatar of the Trinity.
As for believers in a worldwide Flood, I heard a preacher explain how all that water had always been in the sky, providing UV protection for the dinosaurs, which had dutifully gone two by two onto the Ark. The survivors died of skin cancer or something; he wasn’t clear. Moody Bible Institute’s radio station, about as mainstream Fundy as you get.
What does the park do about the dinosaurs?
Thank you for acknowledging that fact.
:rolleyes: yourself.
I said I was an atheist. However, one could well follow the teachings of Christ, and thus be a Christian, without any reference to Genesis. And one could value the moral teachings found in the Gospels without believing that they are a true historical account of anything.
Basically, you’re making the same allegation as Flyer: the Bible is either all true, or all false (although you’re taking reverse positions). You’re showing about as much logic as a fundamentalist yourself.
Do you believe in Pontius Pilate? King Herod?
Well, Pilate was kinda iffy until 1961. 
A classy feature for the Ark Encounter would involve Bill Cosby’s Noah skit playing on a big screen.
It’s the Lord, Noah
Right!
Where are ya?
What you want? I’ve been good.
I want you to build an Ark
Right!
Whats an Ark?
Get some wood build it
300 cubits by 80 cubits by 40 cubits
Right!
Whats a cubit?
Lets see a cubit…I used to know what a cubit was
Well don’t worry about that Noah
When you get that done
Go out into the world and
Collect all of the animals in the world by twos
Male and female, and put them into the ark
Right!
Who is this really?
Why must anyone need to follow the teachings of anyone to be a good person?
I don’t get this at all.
Are people that need religion to be good, fundamentally bad at their core? They believe they will be forgiven for their sins? This question is why I trust an agnostic or atheist much more that a religious person.
‘Faith’ is something we have in ourselves and those that we call our friends. No one that I will associate with needs religion to do the right thing.
If a person needs the fear of ‘god’ of any stripe to do the right thing, they are fundamentally broken. And their god must have broken them. That is not a god that I would trust.
I disagree. Jesus not being mentioned in Genisis doesn’t mean the majority of Christians don’t believe in the concept of God creating the universe.
I never claimed the teachings of the bible weren’t moral teaching. Only that they didn’t come from God.
Also regarding my position on the bible, I never said necessarily that’s it’s all true or all false, only that if its not all true how are we to know which parts are true.
As for King Herod, if someone mentions Ronald Reagan in a recounting of aliens it won’t make the story true.
Herod existed for sure. He put his name on everything.
Now I have to wonder,how did Noah raise $100 million to build his ark? I’m pretty sure he was a few hundred years too early for Kickstarter.
So what? We’re talking about Noah’s Ark, not the creation of the Universe. You keep bringing up other beliefs than the ones under discussion.
You and Flyer appear to make the claim that one cannot be a Christian without being a biblical literalist. This is a patently false claim. The vast majority of Christians are not biblical literalists. In fact, Roman Catholics, the largest single denomination, do not as a matter of doctrine belief that everything in the Bible is literally true.
And really, do you want to be on the same side of this debate as Flyer? :dubious:
Again, so what? What does that have to do with claiming that one must believe in Noah’s Ark to be a Christian, as you have been insisting along with Flyer? Or do you want to back down from that?
You’ve been insisting that one must be a biblical literalist to be a Christian. If that is not what you are saying, please clarify it.
But it demonstrates that not everything in the Bible is false.
[Tangential question alert!]
I know Flyer is a Christian (apparently a literalist too) and I have no idea what White SIFL is, but I’ve noticed a lot lately, that a bunch of non-religious people have this tendency to argue that the only path to God is basically through fundamentalism. Why on earth is that?
[/tqa]
Oh, and for the four people on the internet that still haven’t heard, literalism is a relatively new thing. Seems it’s only been around for the last couple hundred years. Before that was unleaded on us, most took the majority of their bible stories as a fictional representation of how to live a Godly life. So there’s that.
I was at a seminary for a year, back in 1983. Here is one example of how literalism was dealt with.
In my first class on Old Testament history the professor pointed out that the Bibles story of Noah was not the only story of a universal flood. In particular it resembles the Babylonian tale of a flood.
Now, the Hebrews had been conquered by the Babylonians, and many of them taken out of their own land. As a people they were in danger of being assimilated into the cultures of those around them. Up until this period many of the OT stories were oral history, not fully written out. So now they were finalized, so to speak, in written form. And the story of Noah was meant to emphasize how they and their God were different than other, not the same.
The ark that held all the animals was just a box, no way to control it. That was left up to God. In the Babylonian tale it was a ship, and people were in charge. When the waters receded Noah built an altar to God and made a sacrifice of thanksgiving. In the Babylonian tale the people did the same, but their gods are depicted as gathering above the smoke of the sacrifice to savor it’s odor, and saying “Finally, we have someone to feed us again, to honor us” The strength of the Babylonian gods depended on the amount of worshippers, unlike the god of Noah.
So some biblical stories at least are meant for instruction, to show the relationship of humanity to God, and how they deal with each other. They don’t have to be literally true.
The Simpsons did it!
Same sort of thing happens in other two-party debates; people toward the extremes tend to want other people either to join them at their end, or fight them from the opposite end.
I’m firmly atheist. I don’t speak for other non-religious people but for me it’s this - the bible is supposed to be the word of God so why isn’t it literal? If some parts are true and some parts are not then to me the whole book is worthless as a guide since there is no way to distinguish between the two.
I do not userstand why if the flood story is not true that it’s even in the bible to begin with. God either created a flood to punish wickedness or he didn’t. If you think he didn’t then what’s the teaching value of the story? If you believe he did, then why is it such a stretch to believe the a being who created the whole universe out of nothing could create a flood that encompasses the world?
To Colibri - I went back and re-read Flyers comment. I had misunderstood it the first time around. You’re right, I don’t agree with him.
Whoa! I had intended this thread to be about a well-intentioned (by some people) thing that is probably not going to last very long, not a big whizzing contest about religion.
Guess that’s par for the course for this website, however. 
Since you’re back (and have added to the highjack) would you mind answering my question above?
John T. Sladek had a Bibleland theme park in “The Mueller-Fokker Effect.” Funniest part of the whole book.
Excellent point. I just remember the now-banned Robert##whatever constantly arguing that liberal Christians were “anything but” because of this very principal. No amount of reasoning did the slightest good. I gave up early on.
But you know what insists the bible is the word of God? The bible. That’s a bit circular, isn’t it? Regardless, I’m a former fundamentalist who was raised to believe that every word of the bible was literally true. And that had me tied in knots for decades due to all the contradicting passages (among other issues).
Three things changed my mind…
Like Baker mentioned above, I learned in my college World History class how many origin stories were present in other cultures first. I’d already known that Christianity had co-opted Christmas from paganism, so now I’d found out that the same thing had possibly happened with other events? Hmmmm.
Interpretations in literalism change over time. During slavery, many a good, upstanding, church goer used the bible to condone them owning (and abusing) slaves. Something we’re utterly aghast at now and consider the epitome of wrong. Similarly, in a different era, many used their bible to approve of beating children or their wives, likewise, treating both like chattel. Nowadays, no one would dream of doing the same. So, which ‘literal’ interpretation is correct? If God (and therefore the bible) is unchanging, it means we can get it wrong. As such, perhaps it’s not meant to be seen as infallible in the first place.
The cornerstone of my faith lies in the New Testament and with Jesus. Jesus spoke in more parables than He did in plain language. Why? To illustrate His points in ways that His contemporaries could understand better. If that was His primary modus operandi then, when He was right there amongst them, how much more so would God speak to us, through His holy book, in much the same way? Wouldn’t there be a wealth more of information on how to live our lives through nuance than a constant straightforward set of rules?
I mean, think about it. When one is in school, they start out teaching you very basic ideas because that’s all small children can grasp. Like in spelling, I comes before E. But later you discover that’s not always sacrosanct. Sometimes it doesn’t when it follows C. Similarly in life, when you are little you are taught to NEVER LIE. But pretty early on, we understand that in the case of Anne Frank and her family, that was certainly a time of exceptions. So, I definitely feel that God wants us to see a much larger picture than the Pharisees did and I think He gets that we’re smart enough to do so. And not get hung up explaining away semantics or rules-lawyering.
Just my take.
Personally not Christian and possessor of a sort of god-concept but more in the Spinozan pantheist vein, not a god of intention, not a personal god, not an interventional god, and certainly not the Biblical god … and I both see value in the myths and can appreciate how some believe the Bible is both the literal word of god with god using stories to make points about greater truths.
Some perspective from the POV of a Jewish scholar that might be of interest to you if you are interested in a serious response rather than petty beating up on the religious among us. Personally I have no desire to argue the point and would suggest that if that is the way this thread continues to go that a mod consider moving it to GD … where you will no doubt find many takers.
Personally I would view the Bible as akin to a work of art with many contributors in which the completion is the work of the viewer. Some “viewers” use it to undermine the work of science, or to justify oppression of others; some use it to inspire themselves to acts of self-sacrifice for the sake of others and to greatness; some find that the myths tell the stories that help them make sense out of the world and their places in it; and some could care less - they like their art a bit more contemporary, or are put off by the first group. I think I could think that way even exchanging “with many contributors” with “created by God.” In the Jewish tradition God left the world unfinished with each us having the responsibility to do our small part to complete the job (by doing good works/justice); perhaps the Bible can be viewed the same way? Those who find value in it complete the work by using it in the manner that best fits them. If they misuse it, well that is on them not on the text, just as the rest of the world can be used badly as well.
Thanks for taking the time. FTR I have no desire to beat anyone up. I just don’t like flip answers to these questions. But you’re right it’s too complex for this thread so I’ll bow out now.