Hi Oly..... thanx for your interaction.

Regarding:

<What concerns me is that Chistrian theists often appear at to focus on the Bible at the excusion of many seemingly valid sources.>

Aahh.. key word in that sentence of yours is "seemingly" :)
They might "seem" valid to the non Christian...or the secularist, but I don't find them attractive. Obviously I have a faith bias on this.

But more than that. I've read some of these exotic theories and I find they all fall down on one or more crucial issues. Thering for example just seems in a twilight zone of scholarly self indulgence.

Can I draw your attention to the beginning of Deuteronomy... have a close look at it (chapter 1) and as I posted above.. does it not seem to have the ring of truth about it?

cheers

Exammy.. keep away from Meredith.. SHE'S MINE hahaha :) just kidding.

Polycarp wrote:

"Can I draw your attention to the beginning of Deuteronomy... have a close look at it (chapter 1) and as I posted above.. does it not seem to have the ring of truth about it?"

Dear Polycarp,

I don't think anybody seriously contends that none of the Bible is valid. So you have set up what is called a straw man. Sure, some of the Bible is valid. That does not mean that it is entirely valid.

You mentioned legal standards of evidence. We cannot make conclusions beyond a shadow of a doubt in legal proceedings. Therefore we make findings as to validity beyond a reasonable doubt. Which account seems more plausible is generally the standard by which we reach conclusions.

Is it more plausible that there actually was a talking snake or that one of the people who wrote the Bible made up or repeated a story with one of the characters in the person of a talking snake?

The latter is far more plausible.

Poly,

1. I will check-out Deuteronomy.

2. Just to show I can see both sides of an argument:

" A Little girl was talking to her teacher about whales.
The teacher said it was physically impossible for a whale to swallow a
human because even though it was a very large mammal its throat was very small.

The little girl stated that Jonah was swallowed by a whale.
Irritated, the teacher iterated that a whale could not swallow a
human; it was physically impossible.

The little girl said, 'When I get to heaven I will ask Jonah'.
The teacher asked, 'What if Jonah went to hell?'
The little girl replied, 'Then you ask him'!"

3. Are you saying that documents such as the Dead Sea Scrolls are fake? That the Jews were not exciled to Pella and Chtistianity didn't start as a Jewish sect breaking from the mother religion under Hadrian? That the Annas didn't replace the Herods under Augustus? That Jesus wasn't born of a Nun (Virgin)? That Jesus could carry a 150 Kg cross?

4. When I say "seemingly" and the like, I am trying to avoid sounding too categorical. Herein,I would also say that the Christian Gospels seem to have been selected and substantially finialised by the fourth century CE.

5. Last night on the History Channel, it was demonstrated that some medicants in antiquity would induce an ailment via food/dring and then provide the cure, to the astonshment of the onlookers. Also, Greek theists (Zeus worships) were tricked by temples having opening doors (as if by magic) feigned by priests using water-suction systems. Theism was about, power, wealth and/or influence, then, as it too often can be, today.

'Is it more plausible that there actually was a talking snake or that one of the people who wrote the Bible made up or repeated a story with one of the characters in the person of a talking snake?'

Or even that hallucinogenic drugs were being used?

Poly,

Deuteronomy 1:

Reads well, as a land grab. Even if the land was their's by divine order, why exterminate the Amorites, who are humans made in the image of God? Also, notice the reference to Joshua being born of a Nun.

Dear Houellebecq,

Talking snakes? I don't think Poly is that fundamentalist. Albeit, some Christians believe in vegetarian lions on Noah's ark and dinosaurs co-existing with humans. It was only 1992, when Vatican recognized the Sun was indeed at the centre of the Solar System. Something that not only Galilleo, but also the Chinese astronomers of centuries past, tried to unsuccessfully to explain to Christians (to the Jesuits).

O.

p.s. Do you recall the snake in the Seven Faces of Dr Lao? Great Speech!