Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

[lisvaneblue]

I don't know why you keep banging on about us understanding more about science as time passes. I have already agreed that it is the case. No intelligent person claims that we are anywhere near having total knowledge.

On the other hand, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you are 100% convinced that a talking snake appeared in the Garden of Eden.

If nothing else you are tenacious.
Let's go back to Genesis 3 and The Fall. The original Hebrew text says Eve was tempted by 'nachash'..a serpent. English editions of the bible called this a snake, but in literal translation it is a serpent.
A serpent, as you know, can be a sly, treacherous person who exploits a position of trust in order to betray it....Satan

However, it may be that a 'snake' did speak and deceive Eve, and you nor I do not understand how because our 'science' has yet to work it out. Don't dismiss it because you don't understand it.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

If nothing else you are tenacious.
Let's go back to Genesis 3 and The Fall. The original Hebrew text says Eve was tempted by 'nachash'..a serpent. English editions of the bible called this a snake, but in literal translation it is a serpent.
A serpent, as you know, can be a sly, treacherous person who exploits a position of trust in order to betray it....Satan

However, it may be that a 'snake' did speak and deceive Eve, and you nor I do not understand how because our 'science' has yet to work it out. Don't dismiss it because you don't understand it.

That is laughable tosh. Myth. Absolute nonsense.

[lisvaneblue]

That is laughable tosh. Myth. Absolute nonsense.

Thought you would say that. So trust you accept my alternative explanation?

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Thought you would say that. So trust you accept my alternative explanation?

The point is that believers either consider Bible stories as absolute truth or they consider the stories to be merely symbolic or allegorical. Once you shift to the latter option the whole edifice falls as you fall into the confused area that my lay preacher friend describes as 'pick and mix'.

If I told you that I had a discussion about high energy physics with a badger in my garden last night would you believe it? Do you have a convincing audit trail of proof to believe in the talking snake? Do you have any audit trail to prove that a person called Moses spoke to God and recorded his words? Do you have any proof of that 'God'?
Of course not. Poorly educated people thousands of years ago may have believed in those infantilising stories but we have more evidence of the Big Bang than there is regarding a deity creating the universe in a day.
Most believers don't even have an understanding of who wrote their holy books, how the content was collated, added to, sifted out and everything else.
And practically all believers swallow the first religion that is foisted upon them by parents, the state, school etc.

Talking Snake v Big Bang. There is more evidence in support of the latter.

[delmbox]

Thought you would say that. So trust you accept my alternative explanation?

Interesting thread this, would love to know your thoughts on Baloo's question:

Genuine question here as I’m curious about this line of thinking. How are you able you choose to follow one religion over another, or no religion, if your view is not to dismiss anything because it may be you just don’t fully understand it? That would seem at face value to rule no other options out, so why Christianity?