Biblical literalists and literalisms

14.
Submit yourself to every ordinance of man…to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors. —I Peter 2:13

We ought to obey God rather than men. —Acts 5:29

Obviously, when a conflict is afoot, obedience to God takes presidence.

Thruoughout the Bible we do see instances when submission to world rulers contradicted obedience to God. What I notice is the a submissive spirit and attitude was still maintained in disobedience to the government.

See Daniel and his three Hebrew companions.
Sure, at one point they said they would obey God even if they had to die.
Not a hint of disrespectful insubordination was manifested.

It is possible to maintain a submissive attitude toward the government yet choose rather to obey God for conscience sake.

15.
And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. —Mark 16:2

The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. —John 20:1

I don't see this as a slam-dunk contradiction.
Both could be true. They started off when it was dark and while the sun was in the process of coming up, it of course was gradually shedding more light.

How astronomically accurate can we be about the expression "at the rising of the sun"? Mathematical precision in the scientifically measured degree of luminisity is not called for.

That is unless one is hunting for reasons to miss the main point.

That's enough for tonight for me.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Lol. What a pussy you are.

I'm not the one who's afraid of hearing the truth.

Revelation 20:12-15
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Please explain how those verses are not literal. If they are allegorical, metaphorical or otherwise please explain how so.

Or you can continue to reveal the nature of your true character and call me some more names and avoid the debate you initiated.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Here you go:

Revelation 14:9-10
"If anyone worships the beast and its image, and receives its mark on his forehead or hand he too will drink the wine of God’s anger, poured undiluted into the cup of His wrath. And he will be tormented in fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. "

Is this literal or not?

Quite so!

So what's the problem?

Originally posted by @js357
There are 30 alleged contradictions at this site:

https://thoughtcatalog.com/jim-goad/2014/05/30-pairs-of-bible-verses-that-contradict-one-another/

And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven. —Luke 12:10

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. —Romans 10:13

"I used to agonize over those two, because if you commit a sin that can never be forgiven, you burn in the Lake of Fire forever—no turning back, do not pass GO, do not collect $200. So what would happen if, in the same sentence, I said, “Dear Lord, between you and me, the Holy Ghost is kind of a jerkoff, but I’m calling on your name, anyway—so save me, dude”? These two verses can’t be simultaneously true. They cancel out one another."

The man is reprobate in his mind. Suggesting that the two verses above "cancel out one another" betrays reason and logic.

If one commits blasphemy against the Holy Ghost that one will never "call upon the name of the Lord". By rejecting the witness of the Holy Ghost convincing you that Jesus is Lord means you will never believe in Jesus. You cannot be saved once you blaspheme the Holy Ghost.

There's no contradiction. Besides, only an idiot compares verses with verses outside their immediate contex. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of scriptural exegesis knows this.

I won't waste my time on the rest of his comparisons. Is any one of you capable of coming up with your own examples without referring to an internet reprobate?

Originally posted by @josephw
You cannot be saved once you blaspheme the Holy Ghost.

What if someone "blasphemes the Holy Ghost" - as mentioned in Luke 12:10 - but then at some later point has a change of heart and calls upon the name of the Lord as mentioned in Romans 10:13; can they be "saved"?

Originally posted by @josephw
Besides, only an idiot compares verses with verses outside their immediate contex. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of scriptural exegesis knows this.

Don't Christians - in their scriptural exegeses - compare verses with verses outside their immediate context all the time?

Originally posted by @josephw
Please explain how those verses are not literal. If they are allegorical, metaphorical or otherwise please explain how so.

Revelation 20:12-15
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Are not "the book" and "another book" and "the books" and the stuff "written in the books" and the "lake" and the "sea" all allegorical?

Originally posted by @fmf
What if someone "blasphemes the Holy Ghost" - as mentioned in Luke 12:10 - but then at some later point has a change of heart and calls upon the name of the Lord as mentioned in Romans 10:13; can they be "saved"?

Jesus said blasphemy against the Holy Ghost "shall not be forgive".

How can one be saved if one commits a sin that will not be forgiven?

But this can be much more complicated than you might think. In some Christian circles the question is asked whether it is possible to commit such a sin in this dispensation. At the time Jesus spoke those words the religious rulers were out for his blood. After they killed Jesus the Holy Ghost gave witness to those rulers one last time through Steven concerning their messiah. Saul was present at the stoning of Steven and gave his assent. Later Jesus appeared to Saul and ask him why he was persecuting Him. Saul's name was changed to Paul who became the apostle to the gentiles proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Upon believing in Jesus as saviour one is baptized into Christ by the Holy Ghost. (Not to be confused with the baptism with the Holy Ghost by Jesus Christ)

After regeneration(born again)it is impossible to be lost again.

To blaspeme the Holy Ghost means one knows they're doing it in the face of incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Apparently unforgivable.

Originally posted by @fmf
Don't Christians - in their scriptural exegeses - compare verses with verses outside their immediate context all the time?

Not without context.

But yes, they do. Explains a lot, no?

Originally posted by @fmf
[i]Revelation 20:12-15
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which ...[text shortened]... d "the books" and the stuff "written in the books" and the "lake" and the "sea" all allegorical?

Quite literal, but not the kind of books you or I can imagine. But books just the same.

Everything is being recorded. Literally. Make no mistake about that.

The "dead" appear before the throne of God literally, and cast literally into the literal lake of fire. Unimaginable to me. But I cannot explain away the plain language of it. The words are those of Jesus Christ Himself dictated to John.

The wrath of God. Infinite in degree forever and ever.
But so is God's grace to all who will believe.

Titus 2:11
For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,..

Originally posted by @josephw
To blaspeme the Holy Ghost means one knows they're doing it in the face of incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Apparently unforgivable.

Presumably, something or things I've said during my participation here in this community can be construed as unforgivable "blaspheming the Holy Ghost", especially when, having been a Christian, I was aware of Luke 12:10. Does that mean that no conversion, no change of heart, no return to my former faith, no epiphany, and no repentance on my part, according to your ideology, can "save" me from "damnation" now?

Originally posted by @josephw
Quite literal, but not the kind of books you or I can imagine. But books just the same.

If they are not books as we humans know them, and the reference to them is in the languages that humans use, written by humans for humans (perhaps with inspiration from god), and they are "not the kind of books" that the word "book" refers to and are, instead, something beyond that which we can even imagine ~ then aren't we into the realm of allegory?

Originally posted by @josephw
Only an idiot compares verses with verses outside their immediate context. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of scriptural exegesis knows this. I won't waste my time on the rest of his comparisons. Is any one of you capable of coming up with your own examples without referring to an internet reprobate?

Can we expect you to call on others here - sonship, for example - an "idiot" and an "internet reprobate" if he should ever "compare verses with verses outside their immediate context"?