Intellectual honesty and the bible.

[Rainbow Mage]

Moderate readers have to be more intellectually honest, because you know that in today's world we know some of the things the Bible describes is metaphorical at best.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Moderate readers have to be more intellectually honest, because you know that in today's world we know some of the things the Bible describes is metaphorical at best.

I think the issue of intellectual honesty comes into play regarding the process, and criteria involved, in how "moderate" readers are determining which things are metaphorical, and which are literal.

 

[Kenny]

Every fundamentalist will admit that there is some allegories as those who believe it is allegorical will believe that parts of the Bible are literal.

 

[wizanda]

Neither are intellectually honest, some bits are clearly allegory, and some are literal. It amazes me, how many people can't see the difference.

 

[nazz]

First off, lets leave an atheistic/rationalist perspective out of this, and for the purpose of discussion assume the bible is 'true'.

Who is more intellectually honest, the fundamentalist (the bible is literal) or the moderate (the bible is figurative)? Why?

Discuss.

I don't see how honesty fits into the picture. It's simply a difference in how to interpret.

 

[nazz]

Either. Or neither, depending. It depends on the point of view of the person reading.

Intellectual honesty is a matter of approaching the material in good faith. As long as the person is trying to derive meaning from the text rather than to shoehorn the text into a meaning that was decided ahead of time, either one can be intellectually honest.

I've heard people (usually atheists or other non-Christians) say that it's "intellectually dishonest" to adopt anything other than a literalist view of the Bible. I disagree.

While it would be dishonest to simply disregard passages because you don't like what they say, it's still possible to appreciate passages as poetry, metaphor, or in other non-literal ways while still being honest in your approach to the material. I think it all comes down to why the person has decided to interpret a given passage non-literally (or literally, for that matter).

Nicely said. I agree with you up until the last paragraph. Rejecting verses that don't sit right with you is not a problem unless you are also claiming you believe in the entire Bible.

 

[nazz]

I think the most intellectually honest move would be for the literalists to admit they don't really understand what it says, and the allegorists to admit they don't really know what it means".

I don't really agree but I liked your post anyway because it made me chuckle.