By all means, fill me in on the true nature of the matter.
Perhaps, but the verses state, among other things, that a 'mustard seed' of faith is enough to move mountains. That Everest remains stubbornly in place is testament to the contrary. How do you reconcile this?
What do you mean by literal? You actually think anyone thinks Jesus meant you could move a mountain? Mount Everest with prayer? Give everyone a break. It is obviously a hyperbolic statement with meaning elsewhere other than in the literal words.
If one takes the Bible to be literally true, then yes, Jesus explicitly stated that faith can move mountains.
Oh, that is what I believe as well. But the literalist has no choice but to take everything literally.
Somethings can not be taken literally... this trap of everything or nothing literal is childish.
I 100% agree... but try telling this to the "its in the Bible, therefore its literally true" crowd
They don't believe it either... they are quoting dogma and don't understand what they are saying... and when pressed they get all defensive and stupid because they are not being taught or enlightened, they are being attacked.
Indeed; it is as false a dichotomy as 'either evolution or creationism'
You seem to have inferred more form my words than actually exists. As I have said on countless occasions, my beef is the with literalists. If you do not interprit everything literally, then fine. But I am arguing against literalism. Nothing more, nothing less.
well, you need to expose your self to more fundamentalists... pretty much anyone who uses "The Bible SEZ!" as an explanation for science, history, civics, sociology and ethics is a likely candidate... listen closely and you can here them grunting as they try to bend the real world evidence to conform to their Biblical expectations
KCDAD, I'd like you to meet Floatingaxe. She is a literalist: she believes every 'jot and tittle' of the Bible is literally true.
Methinks you have misunderstood the idiom.
Isn't it amazing that God wants us to draw near to Him, to experience a relationship with Him, and to know He's real by knowing His love? Isn't that type of evidence better?That is exactly my earlier point. When backed into a corner, they get defensive and irrational. The left side of the brain shuts down and the survival instincts of the mid and hind brain take over and transfer the discussion away from the rational.
Yes. Your words appear contradictory, or at least misleading, so I require a concise and accurate description.
Irrelevant. Jesus stated that faith moves mountains, and so faith must move mountains, if literalism is true.
I don't believe we are discussing morality
I thought this was obvious: I gave my definition of literal. Floatingaxe, among others, consider 'every jot and tittle' of the Bible, New and Old, to be literally true.
No. Objectively verifiable evidence is the best kind, since all humans can experiance it. 'Personal relationships' are echoed throughout human cultures, and so your claims offer no more support to your beliefs than Shamanistic claims support Shamanism.This relates to the discussion we had several pages ago...
This morning, I was reading some of my old journals...and I came upon a quote. Here's something one of my friends once said (I hope she wouldn't mind me posting it here).
"Faith is to surrender to God not by blind acceptance or rational deduction, but through an all-consuming, personal relationship. What if the existence of God is not something we can prove, it's just something we have to live?"
Seriously... go talk to Floatingaxe, shes around here somewhere... she really DOES believe every word of the Bible is literally true... even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff
