Fundamentalism and Intellectualism

[mpok1519]

lol God doesn't believe in courts, trials hearingsand arraignments.

 

[AV1611VET]

... and the further one actually gets from finding everything needful to salvation in the Bible itself.

Let alone having a perfect text.

Everything?

Not Everyone?

Slip of the tongue?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Everything?

Not Everyone?

Slip of the tongue?

When did you ever consider anything but the Bible to be necessary for salvation, AV?

 

[AV1611VET]

Becase I must say, AV -- "Embedded age" is a laugh-a-minute.

Then you can laugh at these as well:

Behold, thou hast made my days as an handbreadth; and mine age is as nothing before thee:

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old...

 

[Catherineanne]

I believe the literal meaning is broad enough to cover the neighborhood, don't you?

So you didn't check the reference then? Fair enough.

You're confusing literal with super-literal.

There is no such concept as 'super-literal'. Literal is an absolute, not a relative; something is either literal or it isn't, there are no gradations.

The Bible is not to be taken literally. Not because it does not contain anything verifiable, but because the concept of literalism is not part of first century thought, in any ancient culture whatever. Applying it retrospectively will pretty well always result in some degree of distortion.

A train can literally stop on the tracks, even though it's still moving at hundreds of thousands of miles per hour.

Hundreds of thousands of mph? I don't think so!!!

Of course a train can stop on the tracks, unless it happens to be derailed. What on earth does that have to do with the price of eggs?

 

[AV1611VET]

Hundreds of thousands of mph? I don't think so!!!

Okay --- tens of thousands --- whatever.

 

[theFijian]

I don't think you do. The Lord explained in Luke 10 that this is not just literal, but far broader.

Do you only love those living next door to you, or do you interpret it to mean anyone you happen to meet in the course of your day; your work colleagues, your friends, people on the bus and at church?

One is literal, the other is allegorical. Most of us choose allegorical on this one, in line with Christ's words.

Rather one is literal, the other is a metaphor, and a metaphor for other things which are definitely literal, you even list them. Agreed the subject of love is not only the strict literal sense, the person living next door (Jesus was addressing the pharisees and their uber-strict adherance to Lev 19:18), but Christ explains the true spirit of the law and uses neighbour in a wider metaphorical sense not an allegorical sense.

 

[theFijian]

Let me guess --- just like the Rapture too --- right?

Got that right!

Not to mention supralapsarianism?

What of the rest?

 

[Catherineanne]

Rather one is literal, the other is a metaphor, and a metaphor for other things which are definitely literal, you even list them. Agreed the subject of love is not only the strict literal sense, the person living next door (Jesus was addressing the pharisees and their uber-strict adherance to Lev 19:18), but Christ explains the true spirit of the law and uses neighbour in a wider metaphorical sense not an allegorical sense.

I see allegory, you see metaphor.

Metaphor to me involves much more of a change in imagery; 'the road was a ribbon of moonlight', when it clearly was no such thing. Allegory is finding a meaning other than the literal in a normal word, such as 'neighbour' meaning 'everyone on earth'.

However, each to his own. I see no point in disputing a difference of perception on this one.

 

[Split Rock]

God overrides the Constitution --- qv the Mayflower Compact and the Abrahamic Covenant.

!!! JERUSALEM !!!
​

You knew that was coming --- didn't you ---
​

Just for the record, is that your best argument for your assertion that The USA is a "Christian" nation?

 

[redwards]

The Bible is morally neutral, like any other object. People can be generally absurd and abhorrent, but books can't.

First, I didn't call it an evil book, I called it absurd and abhorrent. Which is to say that the contents of it are both silly and grotesque.

Second, I think it's entirely fair to say that some of the things which are expressly condoned in the old testament would be identified as immoral by almost all of the population. I personally find some of the teachings of the new testament to be just as immoral, but I suspect that the ones I can think of off the top of my head would be too easily identifiable as Christianity for your average person to admit their immorality.

 

[redwards]

We're agreed that you think It is --- how's that?I thought I said, 'Christian Theology'?

If you want a student to be exposed to all this other stuff, they can do it overseas --- not here.

This is a Christian nation.

I see the bible isn't the only thing around here that's absurd.

 

[AV1611VET]

Just for the record, is that your best argument for your assertion that The USA is a "Christian" nation?

"God did it" isn't good enough?

 

[Freodin]

Then you can laugh at these as well:

Now that is taking literalism too far... even for you, AV.

Don´t you think that scanning the Bible for the terms "old" and crying "See? Embedded age!" should be even below your level?

 

[AV1611VET]

Now that is taking literalism too far... even for you, AV.

Don´t you think that scanning the Bible for the terms "old" and crying "See? Embedded age!" should be even below your level?

Actually, the passage in 2 Peter jumped out at me in Sunday School yesterday when I was turning to look at another passage.

I jotted it down quickly, then brought it home and put it in my software for further reference.

The passage in Psalm 39 was a cross-reference to something that again, jumped out at me.

 

[Freodin]

Actually, the passage in 2 Peter jumped out at me in Sunday School yesterday when I was turning to look at another passage.

I jotted it down quickly, then brought it home and put it in my software for further reference.

The passage in Psalm 39 was a cross-reference to something that again, jumped out at me.

Ah, so the quoting of these verses were simply another unrelated derail from AV. Sorry to have bothered you.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ah, so the quoting of these verses were simply another unrelated derail from AV. Sorry to have bothered you.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Just for the record, is that your best argument for your assertion that The USA is a "Christian" nation?

AFAIK, it's his only argument.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Then you can laugh at these as well:

I'd laugh if there was a point to those verses.

 

[Catherineanne]

First, I didn't call it an evil book, I called it absurd and abhorrent. Which is to say that the contents of it are both silly and grotesque.

Some of the contents are, certainly. And some are sublime.

Second, I think it's entirely fair to say that some of the things which are expressly condoned in the old testament would be identified as immoral by almost all of the population. I personally find some of the teachings of the new testament to be just as immoral, but I suspect that the ones I can think of off the top of my head would be too easily identifiable as Christianity for your average person to admit their immorality.

Fair enough. As long as morality is a function of people, not of books.