For Christians-Evangelicalism, what's your take on it?

[sojourner]

Who's arguing that? This is a realities of Christianity, always has been...always will be...

Exegesis entails reconciling oneself to the reality that the texts contain errors, rendering a reading based upon an alleged inerrancy invalid.

 

[sojourner]

I don't need to use that sort of language.

What in the world are you talking about???

 

[sojourner]

There are many interpretations but I still find the Holy Spirit revealed version the best.

which "one" might that be? The one you follow? Has it occurred to you that the Holy Spirit might reveal any one of several interpretations, depending upon who's doing the reading?

 

[sojourner]

Have anyone stopped even for a second to think Paul may be one of the bad prophets Jesus warned about?

No.

4 Testaments are direct teachings from Jesus, yet you cite Paul so much...

Which testaments would those be? The gospels? You realize, of course, that much of Paul's writing is earlier than the gospels. You further realize, of course, that Jesus didn't write the gospels, so even the gospels aren't "direct teachings of Jesus."

 

[Walkntune]

which "one" might that be? The one you follow? Has it occurred to you that the Holy Spirit might reveal any one of several interpretations, depending upon who's doing the reading?

I guess this is why i don't write in my Bible.The word is a alive and it gives life and I don't like to lock in an interpretation with my own thoughts as sometimes I can get a more than one interpretation needed from one particualar scripture.If i high lite a particular scripture it might trigger the same old interpretation and cause me to miss the revelation.

 

[sojourner]

I guess this is why i don't write in my Bible.The word is a alive and it gives life and I don't like to lock in an interpretation with my own thoughts as sometimes I can get a more than one interpretation needed from one particualar scripture.If i high lite a particular scripture it might trigger the same old interpretation and cause me to miss the revelation.

Now that makes more sense!

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Exegesis entails reconciling oneself to the reality that the texts contain errors, rendering a reading based upon an alleged inerrancy invalid.

So what are some example of errors? My guess is that they're concentrated in the teachings that are most counter-cultural.

 

[sojourner]

So what are some example of errors? My guess is that they're concentrated in the teachings that are most counter-cultural.

The creation myth, for one. Also the destruction of Jericho as related is unsupported in the archaeological record.

 

[Villager]

The creation myth, for one.

So how is the allegorical nature of early Genesis, as taught and preached by the mainstream, erroneous?

Also the destruction of Jericho as related is unsupported in the archaeological record.

Not much, is it.

 

[sojourner]

So how is the allegorical nature of early Genesis, as taught and preached by the mainstream, erroneous?

First of all, we're not talking about "the mainstream" here. We're talking about evangelicalism, which tends to treat the texts literalistically. If the texts are treated thus, there are many inconsistencies and statements that are not corroborated by science and history.

Second, even the allegorical nature of Genesis is scientifically erroneous. Most of those who argue for inerrancy will try to make the stories jive with science.

 

[sojourner]

Not much, is it.

Oh, there's more. I didn't think it necessary to post a comprehensive list when one or two will prove my point that the texts are not inerrant.

 

[Villager]

Oh, there's more.

Do go on, then.

I didn't think it necessary to post a comprehensive list when one or two will prove my point that the texts are not inerrant.

One? One possible? That's gross misrepresentation.

 

[Villager]

First of all, we're not talking about "the mainstream" here. We're talking about evangelicalism, which tends to treat the texts literalistically.

Not so. That's fundamentalism, which is of Satan himself, in evangelical eyes (and often vice versa).

Second, even the allegorical nature of Genesis is scientifically erroneous.

That sounds like a very fatuous comment. Do put minds at rest!

 

[sojourner]

Do go on, then.


One? One possible? That's gross misrepresentation.

Look 'em up for yourself. They've been available to the casual reader for almost two thousand years...

 

[Villager]

Look 'em up for yourself. They've been available to the casual reader for almost two thousand years...

So there aren't any more.

And good night.

 

[sojourner]

So there aren't any more.

And good night.

That's not what I said. But I'm not going to do your research for you.

Another example would be the differing geneaologies in Matthew and Luke.

 

[Villager]

That's not what I said. But I'm not going to do your research for you.

Another example would be the differing geneaologies in Matthew and Luke.

It's an 'example' that has been demolished many times. But I'm not going to do your research for you!

 

[sojourner]

It's an 'example' that has been demolished many times. But I'm not going to do your research for you!

Not from a literalistic POV.

And, many evagelicals are fundamentalists -- so much so that the two terms have nearly become synonymous.

 

[Villager]

Not from a literalistic POV.

And, many evagelicals are fundamentalists

But they must all be if objection is to be made to evangelicalism. So you still have no errors to report.

so much so that the two terms have nearly become synonymous.

In the TV news, yes. But we know better than that, don't we. We know that fundamentalists profess to despise evangelicals because they care not about literal interpretation, and evangelicals regard fundamentalists as works salvationists, as far from the truth as Catholics and Muslims. So let's have no more of this silly nonsense, eh.

 

[sojourner]

It's this simple: The bible contains errors.

That's really all there is to it. We know it, we accept it, we don't hold the Bible hostage to some arbitrary standard it was never meant to keep.