Can the bible be taken literaly ?
 

I think not , after all...


Do you belive in democracy ?

After all St. Paul doesnt like it (Romans 13)


And Females cant speak during a church service ? (1 Corinthians 14 34)

That pretty much rules out female priests...


Do you wear poltycotten clothing ?

Well Leviviticus 19 , 19 forbids it !


Do you take you skin diseases to your priest ?

Lev. 13 1-2 INSISTS you do so.


Would you sell your daughter into slavery , as permitted by Lev. 21 7 ?




So then I will pose the question...
"Should the bible be taken literaly ?"


Answer...
"No."

Sure. Or it can be taken as fiction. It's your choice! That's what being a grown up is all about. Wheee, fun.

I think what you're really asking is wether a few outdated biblical laws should still be taken seriously. Why not ask yourself (or e-mail the site you got your examples from and ask them) who still takes these seriously anyway? ..or wether a couple outdated laws mean that *none* of them can be taken seriously. A great deal of our moral codes and judicial laws are based on those laws. Society has changed and modernized since then.How does this effect the integrity of the bible in it's entirety?

... but yes, I would and have sold my daughter into slavery.
(She thought it had more integrity then working a fast food job. Dumb shit kids.)

depends on if you want it orally or rectally.

IT DOES MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Not if you put it in a blender first.

You're not cool enough to have a Zoidberg avatar.

The Bible is nothing more and nothing less than a book of mythology that teaches some very good morals. Simple as that. It is not a history textbook, and neither is it a work of fiction. I got the same messages from the ancient Greeks.

...even thought that "mythology book" has more historical facts backing it up then most books we use by Plato or any of the other Greek philosophers that we claim are 100% accurate and historic.

I didn't think anything written by Plato had much to do with historical facts... I thought he delved into philosophy for the most part. Same thing with Socrates, though his best contribution was the Socratic Method.

Aristotle, perhaps... he delved into a lot of areas as an intellectual.

I never said that the Greeks were 100% accurate. I said they were just as believable as the Bible is.

Vince, don't tell me you're a creationist too...

what facts?

Has anyone read "Histories" by Herodotus? It is boring as hell and has some mythology in it, but all the wars and things in it have been proven true - Marathon, Thermopolye etc. Greek and Pesian history, by the way.

I believe in microevolution, not macroevolution. The evidence, if you match up both sides, is about 60/40 "intelligent design" vs evolution. Sexual organs and procreation, blood clotting and memory recall are items that natural selection or just "luck" over billions of years can't explain well enough for me or at all. I've had to do the research on it, and it is a very interesting subject to say the least. Seems as history has went on, evolution has become ever the religion based on facts that are slowly fading away. More and more scientists, if honestly asked, have stated that evolution isnt the be all end all of mankind's history and it shouldn't be taught as such. If education was truly free of bias, they would teach intelligent design as or, or at least the questioning points of evolution.

I have no idea what you just said.

Which scientists?

I'm taking physical anthropology, and I find the issues of evolution interesting. I'm willing to put aside our mutal differences so we can have a reasonable discussion/debate about it, Vince.

Who is to say that evolution can't be the vehicle of intelligent design, even though it seems random to us?
My teacher tells us that it isn't as well. The theory that evolution has some end point that everything is leading up to has pretty much been discarded.
If we taught every single questioning point of all the scientific theories out there, we would be in science class the rest of our lives.

Vinth must still think that evolution means that fish spontaneously start giving birth to mammals and such. :rolleyes

Good morals, my ass. >: If you rape a girl, you must pay her father some money and marry her.

Oh, you were talking about the basic Christian tenets of love thy neighbor, be charitable, turn the other cheek, etc... I don't like those, either. You can have them.

I think you either need to take the entire bible literally, or none of it. I notice people like to pick and choose what to take "Metaphorically" and what to take literal, but that's Okay. The people who are likely doing this aren't going to be a theological expert anytime if their lifetime.

It is true that there are alot of historical "Facts" in the bible, but there are just as many myths and even more things that are just out of place. For example, the birth of christ occured in "0 bc", but the reign of herod ended in 4bc. If you read the bible I believe the three wisemen from the east were being chased by him, and herod was also looking for little Ieshua.

Wanna tell me where it's proven in historical text that bushes COULD sponateously combust? Where water was turned to wine by the touch? Where someone could WALK on water (and I'm not talking puddles)?

One thing I COULD believe is Revelations, or that John (I believe) had visions of Heaven and Hell...

...of course, if I were in the Arabic opium region and was rolling in more pre-illegal substances than thought possible, I might start seeing wacky shit too, then I'll write it down and let clueless fucks millenia from now interpret it as complete fact.

Here's hoping your descendants start worshipping "Skulhedfaceology."

Apparently it's a complex process to differentiate the portions of the bible that can be used as a historical text, along with the more symbolic and prose like passages, juxtaposed with the plain out dated interpretations ... but maybe some of you should try it! I know some bible thumping holy rollers who can handle the multi-faceted language... so why can't some of you heathens?

Seriously, the relevance to any of these arguments stops at your own personal belief system.

He did walk on the water. Just not on top of it. He walked "on the water" just like a beachfront house is "on the water" - on the shore. Blame unclear translations.

I'd believe that before I'd believe Zeus could shoot thurnderbolts out of his ass.

I doubt my children and children's children would worship a no-name loser on an internet message board, so you might as well rewrite that wish.

Pern, if your "on the water" statement is accurate, then why did an apostle walk on the water but his faith lacked so he fell in? I don't think he tripped over a log. People tend to leave that out when they do their "on the water" argument.

--

Anyway, to Jean. I'd love to have a nice discussion about this subject but right now I don't have the time. Perhaps a bit later. But to just give a point I have about the intelligent design theory:

Nature and existance is like a huge mathmatical equation. Nature also does not treat mutations lightly. The complexity of mankind is so great that mathmatically it is illogical to think it happened by chance.

Imangine the situation that you do not know anything about religion or evolution. Someone delivers evolution upon you like someone could introduce Islam or Christanity. Wouldn't you think they were a bit off their rocker?

Ah, is there anything more tiresome than science vs. religion? I submit that there is not.

I agree, Dr. The entire argument is a farce, as the two fields have little in common. Sort of like a lengthy debate of which is superior, Bowling or Pommegranites. You can't get all lathered up talking about the impossibilityy of eating a bowling ball, or how it's hard to even get a pommegranite all the way down the lane let alone knock over any pins and never even realize there's just no damn question to adress.

On the other hnad, Vinth baiting is delightful. SO:

Vinth; nice ducking the question, which was, 'can the bible be taken literally?' What's te matter, was it too difficult for you to understand? Maybe you'd feel more confidant if you had your own website.