What should be taken literal?

[herev]

2Ti 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works

and where does that say it must be literal?

 

[herev]

Psa 119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

and why should that mean it is literal?

 

[herev]

I believe Jesus died on the cross for my sins and I am thankful for that sacrifice.

and here we ought to find our commonality between TE's and creationists. We ought to rejoice in our similarities that draw us together as brothers and sisters, and accept each other for our differences

 

[versastyle]

and here we ought to find our commonality between TE's and creationists. We ought to rejoice in our similarities that draw us together as brothers and sisters, and accept each other for our differences

...but this is far too Christ-like.

 

[herev]

OK, let's see about the new testament. Can I presume the four gospels are taken as actual events by TE's?

the problem is that this whole thread is almost completely unrelated to TE vs creationism. By the time you get past creation accounts, you start to see many varying opinions as to how to treat the scriptures, old and new covenants. This is a topic of Bibliography more likely. In the new testament, there aer varying degrees of literal and non-literal translations. I even know some creationists (not many, of course) who do not hold to a strict literal reading of the gospels

 

[herev]

...but this is far too Christ-like.

and that is the saddest part of this portion of Christian Forums. Here in the Christian only section of the forum, we doubt each other, condemn each other, treat each other as less than--it's really sad