I'm taking out some of jibes and attitude, because you have some very interesting statements here, that are themselves some pretty big assumptions, and I want to think about them.
You do realize, I am sure, that you are in a vast minority who would hold up the Bible as authoritative while simultaneously saying that Bible disagrees with itself and needs to have an 'interpretation' that has to be filtered to properly service the values of the Bible.
There is a vast difference between people who think that every word and event of the Bible is an exact historical accounting, to those who proclaim the Bible consistent and inherent truth. Specific details might differ, but the truth being revealed does not contradict itself. The statement you made basically absolves the Bible as an authority, places that authority on a collective of people who decide which best interpretation to impose on the collective whole. Now, I doubt that is what you mean, but that is what you just said.
That is a gross simplification of the variances of the meaning of 'literal'. I find it difficult to believe that any person, who is at all earnest in faith and a Biblical scholar can so casually cast such a wide and errant generality.
But while you walk around feeling all superior, you are depending on a simplistic view of Biblical work that means you might actually be incapable of understanding what I am saying. The Bible disagrees with itself. You know that, right? Therefore, in order to have an interpretation that values the whole Bible, you have to get past the concept of Biblical Fact. What can we learn from both Nehemiah and Ruth, despite them being so inconsistent with each other, and written at more or less the same time? The multiple creation stories? The four Gospels?
You do realize, I am sure, that you are in a vast minority who would hold up the Bible as authoritative while simultaneously saying that Bible disagrees with itself and needs to have an 'interpretation' that has to be filtered to properly service the values of the Bible.
There is a vast difference between people who think that every word and event of the Bible is an exact historical accounting, to those who proclaim the Bible consistent and inherent truth. Specific details might differ, but the truth being revealed does not contradict itself. The statement you made basically absolves the Bible as an authority, places that authority on a collective of people who decide which best interpretation to impose on the collective whole. Now, I doubt that is what you mean, but that is what you just said.
We are not ignoring any part of the Bible (though, as I admitted before, I can miss parts occasionally when dashing off a Messageboard reply. Are you gonna talk about my concession on the Paul's saying or just pretend I didn't make it?) rather, we are working with the work as a whole, which is something that no self-avowed "literalist" ever does. They can't, because if they did, then they would have to call one verse "right" and the other verse "wrong".
That is a gross simplification of the variances of the meaning of 'literal'. I find it difficult to believe that any person, who is at all earnest in faith and a Biblical scholar can so casually cast such a wide and errant generality.
Presbyterian Church (USA) passes Amendment 10-A.
- 11/05/2011 05:39:29 PM
1286 Views
*NM*
What's the language? Did they at least TRY to give a doctrinal justification?
- 12/05/2011 02:10:46 AM
791 Views
Thank you for that rousing argument against married priests.
- 12/05/2011 03:36:51 AM
780 Views
Why ARE you letting women into the priesthood?
- 12/05/2011 04:16:50 AM
724 Views
Because Episcopalians don't listen to the Bible much.
- 12/05/2011 05:47:03 AM
674 Views
That's just fine as far as I'm concerned
- 12/05/2011 02:23:44 PM
675 Views
Yes, I suppose a church could go that route.
- 14/05/2011 07:38:02 AM
648 Views
I'm not attempting to impose a dichotomy on the Bible.
- 14/05/2011 03:25:30 PM
703 Views
I don't even know what following the Bible in its entirety means.
- 14/05/2011 09:09:10 PM
874 Views
As an exercise, I tried to think of how I would justify allowing homosexuals as clergy.
- 14/05/2011 04:19:43 PM
680 Views
Thanks (I'm actually OK with women priests though).
- 12/05/2011 07:09:11 AM
744 Views
There's ample precedent for female religious leaders, even within the bible.
- 12/05/2011 06:51:05 AM
776 Views
Since when is Moses' society the be-all end all?
- 12/05/2011 07:12:41 PM
652 Views
Since never, which is why I referenced five other eras you completely ignored.
- 14/05/2011 01:11:30 AM
759 Views
They did so, via negativa.
- 12/05/2011 04:22:17 PM
818 Views
Sorry for the delay, particularly since it looks like I'll be spending a fair amount of time here.
- 14/05/2011 12:31:33 AM
620 Views
Your church has a constitution?!
- 12/05/2011 03:36:41 AM
672 Views
My Church has a congress! 
*NM*
- 12/05/2011 03:37:52 AM
349 Views
*NM*
- 12/05/2011 03:37:52 AM
349 Views
Haha no way! *NM*
- 12/05/2011 03:46:32 AM
298 Views
Well, we have one group of laity and one of bishops, so it is only mildy utter chaos. 
*NM*
- 12/05/2011 05:51:09 AM
323 Views
*NM*
- 12/05/2011 05:51:09 AM
323 Views
I'm happy to hear this, personally. I also wonder how you reconcile this with the Bible.
- 12/05/2011 04:11:31 AM
860 Views
Every direct reference to homosexuality in the Bible is a reference to rape.
- 12/05/2011 04:12:43 PM
697 Views
Every single word that you wrote in your response is complete bullshit.
- 12/05/2011 05:50:07 PM
806 Views
Knock off your eisegesis, try some exegesis
- 12/05/2011 07:02:45 PM
750 Views
I'm trying to figure out just what your "gifts" are, because I don't see any.
- 12/05/2011 07:30:39 PM
714 Views
There are cases in which hypocrisy is far better than the alternatives.
- 12/05/2011 10:04:32 PM
789 Views
Hypocrisy is better than, say, setting gays on fire, yes.
- 12/05/2011 10:10:40 PM
754 Views
My statement is that, from a pragmatic point of view, hypocrisy shouldn't be discouraged too much.
- 13/05/2011 10:05:39 PM
752 Views
Oh, is that how we're playing this, then?
- 13/05/2011 06:29:31 PM
705 Views
Re: Oh, is that how we're playing this, then?
- 13/05/2011 07:02:35 PM
695 Views
I'm not playing. I'm pointing out some glaring errors on your part.
- 13/05/2011 07:25:08 PM
636 Views
The Bible says what it says. The problem... people like to tell us just what else it's saying.
- 13/05/2011 05:31:29 PM
656 Views
You don't reconcile... you pick the parts you like and adjust the rest to suit you.
- 13/05/2011 09:33:54 PM
616 Views
Another example...
- 12/05/2011 09:19:52 AM
612 Views
If you claim to follow the entire Bible, then you are completely correct.
- 12/05/2011 06:04:38 PM
590 Views
On the contrary, this move will take some butts out of the seats.
- 12/05/2011 07:16:22 PM
651 Views
We both know that isn't the case
- 12/05/2011 07:55:41 PM
757 Views
Cool cool. I have a question on a semi-related note, about Protestant Gospels
- 12/05/2011 05:33:49 PM
714 Views
No Protestant denomination has added so much as a word to the Bible
- 12/05/2011 05:58:16 PM
589 Views
So, everyone hates Judith, then?
- 12/05/2011 06:40:11 PM
658 Views
The Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Churches accept Judith as part of Scripture.
- 12/05/2011 07:51:27 PM
629 Views
Does the Eastern Orthodox Church also segregate deuterocanonical works like Roman Catholicism does?
- 14/05/2011 02:19:03 AM
933 Views
The Eastern Church bases everything on the Septuagint.
- 14/05/2011 02:34:41 AM
683 Views
That sounds appealing, and makes sense.
- 14/05/2011 02:44:56 AM
701 Views
Oh, I just enjoy calling Protestants "heretics" to remind them not everyone agrees with them.
- 14/05/2011 03:25:42 AM
639 Views
Re: Cool cool. I have a question on a semi-related note, about Protestant Gospels
- 12/05/2011 08:52:48 PM
662 Views
The NIV is terrible. The NASB has the best translation I have found (of the NT, at least).
- 12/05/2011 10:43:58 PM
801 Views
I find this really weird, to be honest
- 13/05/2011 05:48:28 AM
671 Views
Well, it wasn't just Athanasius. But yes, we are lucky in that respect. *NM*
- 13/05/2011 06:32:48 AM
285 Views
Athanasius's list reflected the victory of Pauline Christianity
- 13/05/2011 02:52:53 PM
627 Views
There's a school of thought that says that's a strong vindication of Athanasius. 
- 14/05/2011 02:37:49 AM
571 Views
- 14/05/2011 02:37:49 AM
571 Views