Who was it that said that fictional stories often contain far more truth than factual accounts? Whoever said it was right.
These stories are often seen as metaphors.
But a fictional story is a story which is not true. Fiction means that by definition, it means imagined or made-up. So it seems that the person you quoted is wrong.
Why do you agree with him? You must be talking about something else.
But a fictional story is a story which is not true. Fiction means that by definition, it means imagined or made-up. So it seems that the person you quoted is wrong.
Why do you agree with him? You must be talking about something else.
Krumple: there has been a great deal of commentary on the stories you mention. Do you really think the Babel is story is as plain as you describe it? That it has no nuance, that the meaning is simply so cut and dry?
Pretty much yeah I do. The gist of the story is obey or the wrath of god be upon you. I could give a cometary that shows the story is pointing out how ancient people lacking knowledge in physics felt they could build a tower that would not crumble under its own weight. That they took the collapse as a sign from god, but it was nothing other than failure of the tensile strength of the material being used. But as far as a metaphor goes, show me some examples of how it teaches something other than submission.
Pretty much yeah I do. The gist of the story is obey or the wrath of god be upon you. I could give a cometary that shows the story is pointing out how ancient people lacking knowledge in physics felt they could build a tower that would not crumble under its own weight. That they took the collapse as a sign from god, but it was nothing other than failure of the tensile strength of the material being used. But as far as a metaphor goes, show me some examples of how it teaches something other than submission.
Pretty much yeah I do. The gist of the story is obey or the wrath of god be upon you. I could give a cometary that shows the story is pointing out how ancient people lacking knowledge in physics felt they could build a tower that would not crumble under its own weight. That they took the collapse as a sign from god, but it was nothing other than failure of the tensile strength of the material being used. But as far as a metaphor goes, show me some examples of how it teaches something other than submission.
Our friend Amperage has found something you seem to have missed.
Perhaps the Tower represents prideful men seeking to elevate themselves to the same level as God? And that the fall of the Tower demonstrates that such efforts are vain and lead certainly to folly?
How is this not the same reasoning that if you are not submissive you'll be punished for it? Exercise humility and how dare you compare yourself to god, you shall suffer for such thoughts! It's the same.
Secondly, what is in inherently wrong with being submissive to that which is greater than ourselves?
Like gravity, perhaps. I don't think anyone complains about being subservient to the laws of nature.
But gravity is first of all observable and secondly it is not convoluted. Thirdly, it does not hinder me from doing what I want, so why complain about it?
What do I mean by convoluted? Thall shalt not have any other god before me. Is incredibly convoluted and it is not observable in any way. Anything can be considered a god so you would always be on conflict with it. On top of that, you would be punished for it.
Gravity is clearly defined, where as biblical rules are not. The laws of physics are either clearly defined or they have such little effect on me, what difference would it make if I obeyed them or not? Do I really have to worry about subatomic bonds? Probably not.