jaej

What christian apologetics are you referring to? I know a little about that stuff, but not much..

__________________
Μολὼν Λαβέ

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

Og

I get what you're doing. It's effectively like analyzing what is WRONG with a square peg that it won't go into a round hole.

Would you really spend time analyzing flaws in star wars if someone thought it was real? I think the more important question is why do they believe its literal in the first place.

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
The self is not a fixed entity but a dynamic process of relationships
You & I, no distinction. - Tat Tvam Asi
Become Who You Are

jaej

The only reason you say it is flawed is because reading it literally doesn't make sense. Of course it's going to seem flawed-the very idea of it being literal truth is just silly. Snakes don't talk to people. Virgins don't have babies. People don't come back from the dead. The book isn't flawed, it's the view people have of it.

__________________
Μολὼν Λαβέ

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

lauraclay

So if there's no point in analyzing it, start a thread about something else. If people want to talk about misconceived perceptions of the Bible, let them. Start a thread about why people think the Bible is literal. No discussion is pointless. You never know what you'll learn.

__________________

The purpose of a fish trap is to catch fish,
and when the fish are caught, the trap is forgotten.

The purpose of a rabbit snare is to catch rabbits.
When the rabbits are caught, the snare is forgotten.

The purpose of words is to convey ideas.
When the ideas are grasped, the words are forgotten.

Where can I find a man who has forgotten words?
He is the one I would like to talk to.

Vencedor

Maybe i am giving literal Christianity too much credit here. but even though it seems obviously untrue i at least allow the possibility of it being true, which is why i feel i can look for flaws in that belief, to try to establish whether it is true or not. I dont feel that i can just look at it and instantly decide that it can't be true.

jaej

I don't think that's the point here. What Og is saying is that ultimately, taking it literally is silly, and so trying to prove it literally false is silly too. Like the Star Wars allusion. Of course there are holes in the plot, that's the way stories are. You ruin its beauty if you start tearing it apart like that.

I know, Star Wars beautiful. What a nerd, right.

__________________
Μολὼν Λαβέ

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

Og

Star Wars is partially the work of Joseph Campbell.. The greatest mythologist of our time. It revolutionized absolutely everything about holywood. Things like pixar were created to make star wars. All modern special effects are based on that movie. It is a line in the sand in terms of the story in the post vietnam era and in terms of the technology of film making. And it's good geek food It's objectively beautiful.

Literal interpretation of the bible creates an images of an actual super-being who can be swayed by our prayers and may intervene in the world. This is an innocuous claim. The false claim is that we are free agents separate from one another and that we have the ability to choose to behave ultimately good or bad and that eternal punishment or reward awaits us due to our choices.

It's demonstrably true that free will does not exist as an ultimate idea. It is an illusion we live with. Therefore, the literal interpretation of the bible is false.

This doesn't mean that the text doesn't have flaws or bad messages, it's just that they don't matter when it's looked at as an allegory.

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
The self is not a fixed entity but a dynamic process of relationships
You & I, no distinction. - Tat Tvam Asi
Become Who You Are

Chapstiquelova

Actually the bible does mention dinasors, Just it doesnt call them "dinasors"
Like today we call a chicken a chicken back then they could have called them anything.
I will see if i can find the name for u.

jaej

Yeah, it talks about them in the book of Job.

__________________
Μολὼν Λαβέ

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

Tanglefoot

I think that indeed the bible is flawed, but maybe I’m just thinking much too shallow. It just seems to me that the bible is outdated and many of its scriptures do more harm than good. I think we would be surprise as to how many folks do indeed take the bible literally. Some followers take serious the scripture that states the word of God is perfect and unchanging. The churches that I have attended do not preach that the bible should not be taken literally, at no time have I heard a preacher say that a bible story in the bible did not actually take place, it’s just a metaphor. When we say the bible is the word of God and it is perfect, does that not lead folks to believe the actual words. Does the verses that says “a woman was made for man, man not for women” do harm? I have problems with verses that tell us that women are unclean for 7 days after their cycle and anyone that touches them is unclean. Same with the word telling us to stone to death homosexuals, rebellious kids, folks that work on Sunday, non-virgin brides, non-believers and many more. What about verses that tell us it’s permissible to beat your child with a rod. There are folks out there that believe this without question.
We wonder where these folks come from that abuse women and children; some just might come from a background of a strict interpretation of the bible. I see the Bible written by ancient people that were guided not by God, but by there belief in their God.
For what its worth, I think it is time to take a hard look at the bible and either revise the content or put a warning label on the front page. Just one more opinion for the thread..