True dat.

Yeah, no. I'm just saying the girl chose a bad example.

No problem, I appreciated the trivia.

I wasn't talking about you.

I don't hate them but someone advocating the fact that they eat you before your corpse is cold is just too much imo.

*chancellor

"Should of" *cringes*

Not really. Books are made up by words, words can have multiple meanings. People have interpreted the Bible in many ways, and nobody can know with absolute certainty what the authors meant when they wrote this or that story.
And that's just the original text in Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic, but the Bible was translated into so many languages it was inevitable that there would be more opinions based on a slightly different translation. Also, I'm not a historian so correct me if I'm wrong but I think that all the other translations were done based off the latin translation, Vulgata. So even the first translation might have been a bit off, and then all the others were based on that. It's like playing Chinese whispers.

Hahaha, yes.

I know, it's horrifying.

Well, what if you believe in the pantheistic kind of Christianity? (Meaning God = nature) Wouldn't you then believe that nature created everything by evolution? The question is whether it's still Christianity, believing in God but not in biblical stories. I think the methodists do that, they believe that the Bible is to be taken as a metaphor, "moral of the story" kind of thing, not literally.

"Waste vaulable resources". Yeah sure, I'd eat my grandma's dead dog too if I was incapable of forming emotional bonds.

Evolution doesn't apply to abstract concepts.

Ooooh. Thanks.