So you made a extreme statement about the Characters in the Bible being to support a Creationsit account.
So rather than admit the possibility of this being possibly extreme we have.
Quote
For example, I think we would all agree that "God" (Lord, El, Elohim, Jesus) is the main topic of the bible. So, in Genesis we have God creating the earth, humans, etc. The way God is described in the bible is also used THROUGHOUT the Bible. So, in a passage that seems to telling some mundane story, might (probability) actually be CONTINUING to describe the creator (God) over and over and over and over again.
So I suppose the descriptionm of the holiness code regarding the "uncleanliness" of menstrating women is actually describing "God"? Or how about the Day of Nicior in I Maccabes? I could go on very easily. Why not just admit that the Bible is not just describitions of "God".
You say:
Quote
When I say "creation story", I don't mean an acute (Genesis 1) "creation event" but rather the IDENTITY of the purported creator (using symbolism) is used over and over and over in the bible specifically whenever the "Lord" is nearby (in the text/story/context).
YAWN!
OH and all your quotes prove zero. I could of course go through the Bible and have quote after quote describing people doing mundane things. But given your loose defintion of "creation" story, which verges on non-fasifiability no doubt its all "creation" stories. I have no desire to waste my time.
Oh and virtually none of the quotes seem to have anything to do with "creation", except in your near non-fasifiable definition.
you say:
Quote
It's not preconceived. How could ANYONE guess or even think the whole of the bible (i.e. the identity of God) would be spread THROUGHOUT the bible (rather than Genesis or the more obvious parts)?
Your use of quotes illustrates your preconception along with your catagorical statements. The way you define "creation" makes it quite clear that the mere mention of God would "support" your fantasy. Obviously someone guessed otherwise why are you saying it?
You say:
Quote
This symbolic interpretation is rigid and consists of elements/attributes that follow a distinct pattern.
I agree with the "rigid", although I think dogmatic and simple minded are more accurate.
Quote
Understood. I'm saying that even literalist interpretations of the Exodus will reveal nothing useful.
Than why did you you set up the strawman of 'literalism"?
Quote
The only way you can provide "evidence" of said symbolism is from circumstantial evidence.
Translated fantasize and hallucinate. Please provide evidence that such esoteric symbolic coding was done at all.
You say:
Quote
Use crosswalk (bible search) and see for yourself.
Giggle, Giggle. Such touching innocence!
You say:
Quote
Not when they're talking of "God". That's the amazing part. When someone here posted [www.earlychristianwritings.com] which I'd never seen before, I fully expected to see the SAME imagery found in the bible. Lo and behold, see my sig. line as ONE example amongst many different writings.
Ah the true believer mindset. And so innocent! I suppose you havn't heard of efforts to combine Greek philosophical beliefs with the Bible. Oh since you fully expected to find it of course you did. "I've found what I'm looking for".
YAWN!!
Pierre
