Uh, because only a fool would believe such an incredulous tale?

Hint: YOU CAN'T SURVIVE IN THE BELLY OF A FISH FOR 3 DAYS WITHOUT BECOMING FISH FOOD!

Yea and you can't raise people from the dead either right?

Anything is possible with God.

there is no indication from Jesus' words that he takes the STORY literally. I can make statements that refer to STORIES without having to take the STORY as literally true. my god can't believe i had to explain that to you like a 5 year old.

You asked a poster to bear the burden of proof that the existence of Julius Caesar was more certain than that of Jesus.

I made a case for why this was.

You responded by claiming you follow an approach closer to academic historians. As proof you posted an analogy which I showed was horrible.

That is all. Handwave all you want, all my posts have adressed your questions and indeed your claims. This is all the meta-discussion I'm going to bother with on this.

Yes there is indication. He confirms people being born. He confirms commandments. So are you saying you shouldn't take the commandments literally also? He confirms that the OT is the Word of God. And that cannot be altered (cannot be broken), (John 10:35). When you show me anything in God's Word that points to not taking those stories literally, i will put some effort into looking at it your way...

Carry on w/ the insults.

dude, take 10 seconds and just think (for the first time in your life?), that you might actually be wrong about something. theres a difference between commandments and a STORY. Again, why i have to explain this to you like a child is ridiculous.

Anyways if you really did care to learn more about the OT stories (which you dont, but whatever) you can use this thing called "Google", or you can PM Prax, she will be more than happy to waste her time explaining to you.

The commandments were part of a story, just like Jonah being swallowed by a whale was part of a story. Please provide something in the Bible that points to not taking this story literally, or please refrain from posting. You claim i may be wrong on this, but i am not the one pulling stuff out of thin air.

Should the beach Jonah was spit out on not be taken literally? Should the name of his father not be taken literally? Should the name of Jonah not be taken literally? Should the sailors not be taken literally? Should Jonah's prayer not be taken literally? Should the town of Nineveh not be taken literally? So on so on and so on...

Should the people sinning not be taken literally? No, only the whale part should not be taken literally because Dknight says so.

Praxising, if you have something that points to not taking this story literally, i would love to see it.

No. Let me remind you what I said right at the start:

...

I responded by talking about verifying existence. Existence of persons has a fairly low standard. It doesn't take much to say that a person existed.

I know you said you're done, but I want to throw this explanation out there anyway.

"Which person is more likely to have existed? George Washington or Abraham Lincoln?" Since both people are known to exist, the question is pointless. You may still ask "For whom do we have more references in books, paintings, or other sources?" and say that one has more than the other, but this does not in any way assert more confidently the existence of one person over the other.

From a Christian perspective being that we believe God created the heavens and the earth, would it be a stretch for us to believe God could do this?

This is where faith comes in. Count me a fool...

Hey, (if) there's a god, I would believe he could do it too! The point I've been trying to make in this whole thread, is that this has nothing to do with what god can and can't do (if he exists). It has to do with trusting incredibly far fetched stories written down by bronze age men. THAT'S who you're putting your faith in. It doesn't even have anything to do with your faith in god.

And such a story is ludicrous. Sorry in advance as I don't normally resort to name calling. But unless someone were told this story by god himself, only a fool would believe it. There's just no other way to describe someone who would believe such an absurdity.

This post is what is absurd. Jesus was not from the bronze age.

you cannot be a real person

Ditto.

So Jesus was from the bronze age?

You atheists just get smarter and smarter by the day.

Gunth, im more than willing to put down any amount of money you can muster up on a head to head IQ test. Until then, improve on your 1st grade level reading comprehension.

QFT. You refuse to answer any question i ask.

Be careful what you wish for.

Do you know what QFT means? Cause you basically just insulted yourself.

Theres no reason to answer a question that has no bearing on the text that the question is based on. Lestat said the writers of the story (hint: the Jonah story) were from the bronze age. You follow that up by saying that Jesus was not in the bronze age. So, we either can conclude that you are purposely trying to troll this forum with your fake ******edness, or that you have the reading comprehension of a 5 year old. Which is it?

Jesus confirmed the story of Jonah. Or did you overlook that detail. Keep insulting yourself.

Are you able to provide anything in the Scripture that backs your claim that we should not take the story literally? Or am i just an idiot for asking this?

(Hint. My QFT did not mean quoted for truth)

pull out a dictionary, look up the word "confirm" and then come back once you can explain to us all how Jesus "confirmed" the story of Jonah as being literal, factual, and historical.

I am making no claim as to whether the story of jonah should be taken literally or figuratively. I just find it absolutely hilarious that you think its 100% certain that because Jesus made a reference to an OT story, that we should just believe you that that means it is 100% literal and factual. Again, your reading comprehension really needs some work here.

And can you provide anything in the Scripture that backs your claim that we should take that story (and all OT stories) literally? Because I'm sure most of the regular theist posters on this board would love to see that.

cool story bro.

-of persons; not subject to change
-Being firmly settled in habit; inveterate.
-Having received the rite of confirmation

John 10:35
Matthew 15:6, 9
Matthew 5:18
Matthew 22: 29-31

Um okay...

Then there are the other verses where He stated other things in the OT were true, i provided those in earlier posts. And there are more than those.

Are you kidding? You are pushing the idea in this thread that the story should be taken literally. Yet you are providing absolutely no Scriptural evidence why.

And to address what you said earlier when you said that my fellow Christians are leaning that it should not be taken literally i advise you to look at the poll results of this thread:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/13...ll-7946-a.html

Jesus made many references to the OT being true. Not one time did He refer to it being not true. Obviously it isn't my reading comprehension that is the problem here.

Yes i have provided a lot of Scripture. I am sorry you can't follow it.

you keep failing massively at this. I'm asking you how Jesus confirmed that the *story* of jonah should be taken as literal, factual, and historical just because Jesus referenced it. If you can't understand the words I am writing, then stop replying.

I'm not pushing any idea. Like I said, I am only responding to your unsubstantiated claims that because Jesus referenced the *story* of Jonah, that somehow means he wants us to treat the *story* of Jonah as literal, factual, and historical. If you still hold to this belief, then you must live a very strange and confusing life.

take a basics statistics course you ignoramus. Regardless, I have stated that the *regular* Christians on this board would lean against taking the story as completely literal. They are more then welcome to post in this thread and correct me if they want.

Again, if you actually care to hear the arguments of the other side, stop making other people do the work for you. Theres this site called "Google" and it exists for exactly this type of situation.

theres a difference between literal and true. Until you start to understand that words have meanings, and that just because you use a word doesnt mean you can define its meaning, then we may be able to have a normal conversation.

fwiw, i wasnt asking if he literally believed the story of Jonah to ridicule him. anyone who would believe that story actually happened is beyond the scope of reason to resuscitate. i just wanted to make sure i could safely ignore him in the future. and its painfully obvious that i can.

Once again, please provide one verse in the scripture that points to that we should not take the story literally. One verse please.

You say i am failing but i am not the one relying on insults right now to back up my argument.

Dying Actors why are you even posting in RGT if you are just going to ignore posters who think the Bible is true?

The original text of the story of Jonah is enough to reach the conclusion that the story of Jonah can be (not necessarily must be, but can be) taken figuratively. Since there is no verse that says "the story of Jonah should be taken literally", you are on equal footing as me here.

Again, do you take the entire bible to be literal? Like the creation story 1 day = 1 24 hour period?

Guess i have to re post this for you:
Jesus is confirming the existence of certain people of the Bible. Including Adam and Eve. We may be on equal footing here but you are heading the wrong way.

If you are going to make an argument on a forum, you should really back it up. It is not my job to back up your argument for you. (but say please and i might do it if it is possible...)