To the Christians who don't take the Bible literally:

Page 1 of 9 [ 143 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9 Next

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 Feb 2011, 1:58 am

Consider this:

2 Peter 1:20-21
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

You must believe that the Bible is literally God's word. Otherwise, you should just ditch the faith.

Cheers.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Feb 2011, 2:20 am

You have not even come close to proving a Scriptural requirement of literal interpretation, and to imagine that you have is rather pathetic.

No, you're probably right; you've found one verse which completely refutes the basis of almost all modern academic theologians. I'm sure you know the Bible better than any of them do.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 Feb 2011, 2:27 am

Orwell wrote:

Two verses. And hey, that passage is in the Bible, so it should count as Biblical truth.

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

16 Feb 2011, 2:35 am

Orwell wrote:

Sarcasm does not become you but it can be satisfying.

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 Feb 2011, 3:00 am

If the above passage wasn't satisfying, here's another:

2 Timothy 3:16-17
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

16 Feb 2011, 3:29 am

MCalavera wrote:

Every scripture is important I agree. I see no statement that I should take the story that Jonah was inside the while literally. Though I keep an open mind about Samson with his super-strength; cause that is just cool.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Feb 2011, 3:44 am

MCalavera wrote:

And that still does not prove your point that Biblical Literalism is the only acceptable view.

You used to be a fundamentalist, right? What's happened here is that, even in your atheism, the indoctrination you got in that branch of Christianity still holds sway. I know a couple people like that.

This sort of ridiculously rigid all-or-nothing stance is one of my biggest gripes with fundies. It leads to so many people rejecting the faith because they have been led to believe that the only valid interpretation of that faith is one which is obviously nonsense, and so conclude that the faith itself is garbage.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 Feb 2011, 3:51 am

91 wrote:

MCalavera wrote:

Yet you take the accounts of Jesus' resurrection very literally. So why do you have some doubts about Jonah's story?

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 Feb 2011, 3:55 am

Orwell wrote:

And that still does not prove your point that Biblical Literalism is the only acceptable view.

It's in the Bible, is it not? How many conflicting views should there be?

Quote:

You used to be a fundamentalist, right? What's happened here is that, even in your atheism, the indoctrination you got in that branch of Christianity still holds sway. I know a couple people like that.

Maybe that's true. But what does this have to do with what the Bible itself says?

Quote:

This sort of ridiculously rigid all-or-nothing stance is one of my biggest gripes with fundies. It leads to so many people rejecting the faith because they have been led to believe that the only valid interpretation of that faith is one which is obviously nonsense, and so conclude that the faith itself is garbage.

That's your opinion, and I respect that. But notice that all you have done is attempt to psychoanalyze me instead of addressing the actual points. Why is that?

Kenjuudo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Mar 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,552
Location: Norway

16 Feb 2011, 3:59 am

The bible presumably states you shan't take anything away and not add more. For this is the word of God, and it's is good/perfect. Or something along those lines.

_________________
When superficiality reigns your reality, you are already lost in the sea of normality.

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

16 Feb 2011, 4:05 am

MCalavera wrote:

Yet you take the accounts of Jesus' resurrection very literally. So why do you have some doubts about Jonah's story?

One does need to believe in the infallibility of the text to get to a belief in the resurrection.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Feb 2011, 4:08 am

MCalavera wrote:

It's in the Bible, is it not? How many conflicting views should there be?

Except that neither of those passages say "Interpret the Bible literally," rather, that is your interpretation of what they say. So your claim is inherently self-refuting anyways. If we can only take literal interpretations, then those passages don't say what you claim they say, so we can take non-literal interpretations.

Quote:

But notice that all you have done is attempt to psychoanalyze me instead of addressing the actual points. Why is that?

Because your point is self-evidently wrong, and the more interesting question here is how you came to it and why you continue to adhere to it.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 Feb 2011, 4:13 am

91 wrote:

MCalavera wrote:

Yet you take the accounts of Jesus' resurrection very literally. So why do you have some doubts about Jonah's story?

One does need to believe in the infallibility of the text to get to a belief in the resurrection.

But the passages I quoted tell you that all Scripture is from God not from man. So why reject one story that God tells you but accept another. Can God's word not be fully trusted?

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 Feb 2011, 4:18 am

Orwell wrote:

Except that neither of those passages say "Interpret the Bible literally," rather, that is your interpretation of what they say. So your claim is inherently self-refuting anyways.

I didn't get how it's self-refuting. Sure, it's my interpretation, but I don't see how it's not based on what the specified passages exactly say. Whose authority should we go to for Christian understanding? The Scriptures ... or certain Christian scholars that you agree with?

Quote:

If we can only take literal interpretations, then those passages don't say what you claim they say, so we can take non-literal interpretations.

Alright, why not tell me your interpretation of those two passages above.

Quote:

Because your point is self-evidently wrong, and the more interesting question here is how you came to it and why you continue to adhere to it.

Because as much as you don't like to hear it, it is in the Bible.

Enough trying to analyze me and address my points with actual arguments instead of just yipping and yapping.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Feb 2011, 4:27 am

MCalavera wrote:

Sure, it's my interpretation, but I don't see how it's not based on what the specified passages exactly say. Whose authority should we go to for Christian understanding? The Scriptures ... or certain Christian scholars that you agree with?

Here we still have the typical Fundie Fail of conflating one's one interpretations with the Scripture itself.

Quote:

Alright, why not tell me your interpretation of those two passages above.

To me, they simply say that Scripture is a useful guide.

Quote:

Because as much as you don't like to hear it, it is in the Bible.

I already addressed this. You have to understand the distinction between your reading of Scripture and the actual Scripture.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

16 Feb 2011, 4:46 am

MCalavera wrote:

91 wrote:

MCalavera wrote:

Yet you take the accounts of Jesus' resurrection very literally. So why do you have some doubts about Jonah's story?

One does need to believe in the infallibility of the text to get to a belief in the resurrection.

But the passages I quoted tell you that all Scripture is from God not from man. So why reject one story that God tells you but accept another. Can God's word not be fully trusted?

The doctrine of literalism is a subset of the doctrine of infallibility; which is itself a subset of the doctrine of inspiration. The passages you cited could be taken to support any of the previously mentioned views. Only the literal view would require the believer to think Jonah was inside a whale; the other two views allow for allegory and symbol. As to the resurrection, not all of the books are equally well established within history. The ressurection has a pretty good historical argument to back up both the scripture and the belief in the resurrection.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

Page 1 of 9 [ 143 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9 Next

Jump to:

To the Christians who don't take the Bible literally: Post Reply New Topic

To the Christians who don't take the Bible literally: