@thinkofone saidIndeed.
C3 had it pegged from the beginning:
[quote]If someone likes what a specific verse or verses say, it's literal.
If someone dislikes the message, then they either dismiss it, or convince themselves it's a metaphor.
In your case Dive, you do not want to believe in hell, so you will continue to argue against any scripture that deals with hell.
"Go and sin NO more ...[text shortened]... wants separation of the races? It's in there.
You want a God that supports slavery? It's in there.
This thread is a classic example of interpreting the bible to fit one's own ideal of how things should be, and shouldn't be.
If you agree, it's literal.
If you disagree, it's either a metaphor, or could not possibly be endorsed by Jesus.
Maybe that's why Christianity has hundreds of denominations.
@thinkofone saidWhat type of death?
How exactly have I changed the text?
Like I said, "...given the caliber of the posters on this forum...".
@thinkofone saidThe truth remains the truth no matter how people take it to suit themselves, they can change the meaning of clear text into things that they perfer over what is written. They can say this is good text, that isn’t, always making the Word suit what they like over what the Word says. The division is due to people’s rejection of truth, it isn’t because the truth is broken.
C3 had it pegged from the beginning:
[quote]If someone likes what a specific verse or verses say, it's literal.
If someone dislikes the message, then they either dismiss it, or convince themselves it's a metaphor.
In your case Dive, you do not want to believe in hell, so you will continue to argue against any scripture that deals with hell.
"Go and sin NO more ...[text shortened]... wants separation of the races? It's in there.
You want a God that supports slavery? It's in there.
1 edit
@kellyjay saidAnd yet you get into all manner of self-caused scapes and tangles and stonewallings and deflection-a-thons over your own preferred interpretation of "the meaning of clear text".
The truth remains the truth no matter how people take it to suit themselves, they can change the meaning of clear text into things that they perfer over what is written.
@fmf saidI don’t ignore text, neither do I dismiss text by claiming it doesn’t say what it says. I don’t change the text into something it doesn’t say to pervert the text.
And yet you get into all manner of self-caused scapes and tangles and stonewallings and deflection-a-thons over your own preferred interpretation of "the meaning of clear text".
@kellyjay saidIt's all about interpretation, yours and everyone else's. You trying pass off yours as anything other than just another interpretation doesn't work.
I don’t ignore text, neither do I dismiss text by claiming it doesn’t say what it says. I don’t change the text into something it doesn’t say to pervert the text.
@chaney3 said40000 denominations, still he's asking for ur opinion. Agreeing with the crowd is not a sign that you are correct
Indeed.
This thread is a classic example of interpreting the bible to fit one's own ideal of how things should be, and shouldn't be.
If you agree, it's literal.
If you disagree, it's either a metaphor, or could not possibly be endorsed by Jesus.
Maybe that's why Christianity has hundreds of denominations.
1 edit
@kellyjay saidwhat is the truth then?
The truth remains the truth no matter how people take it to suit themselves, they can change the meaning of clear text into things that they perfer over what is written. They can say this is good text, that isn’t, always making the Word suit what they like over what the Word says. The division is due to people’s rejection of truth, it isn’t because the truth is broken.
1 edit
@divegeester
btw it's possible to make perfectly fine metaphors out of literal stuff and vice versa from the bible ...
But lets just focus on the thread as you have put it. You drive a fine point.