Biblical literalists and literalisms

Originally posted by @chaney3
You are wrong.

You are delicately trying to evade Bible truth, contradiction and literalism.

The truth is.....if Jonah didn't survive in a fish, then the Noah story could be made up. Jesus could be made up.

You either believe ALL of it, or NONE of it!!

Read the thread.

Originally posted by @chaney3
Dive,

Tell me why Jesus is true.

Tell me why revelation is not true.

Tell me why Jesus won't watch people in hell.

You cherry pick the Bible.

If you are going to be a drunken idiot then I'm simply going to ignore you. Read the thread before your post you ignoramus.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Read the thread.

No dive.

You like the good things.

You ignore the bad things.

You cherry pick.

Originally posted by @divegeester
If you are going to be a drunken idiot then I'm simply going to ignore you. Read the thread before your post you ignoramus.

Why insults???

I see what you are doing.

Originally posted by @chaney3
Why insults???

I see what you are doing.

I'm not interested chaney3.

Originally posted by @divegeester
I'm not interested chaney3.

I know.

You love YOUR Jesus.

Ya know.....the good one.

But you ignore the rest of the Bible.

How convenient for you.

Originally posted by @fmf
Is the writing implement allegorical?

What writing implement are you referring to? Oh, I see, the one from your imagination you threw into the mix.

Originally posted by @gswilm

Is "the Bible is the inerrant Word of God" a major tenet of the Christian faith?

There may be an ultra-conservative school of thought of Inerrancy which would deny copyist errors among the thousands of extent copies of the OT and NT Scriptures. I have never been of that opinion.

I learned the subject from a book [b]"A General Introd ...[text shortened]... Dr. Bart Erhman and Dr. James White on this ? Its worth your while IMO.

[b] - sonship [/b]

Good post. Sad that it appears thus far it has gone unnoticed.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Are you ever going to tell me if you think the entire bible is literal or just some of it? 😉

Are you not reading my posts elsewhere in this thread? I've answered all your questions in other posts.

You should read your own thread dude.

Originally posted by @gswilm

Is "the Bible is the inerrant Word of God" a major tenet of the Christian faith?

There may be an ultra-conservative school of thought of Inerrancy which would deny copyist errors among the thousands of extent copies of the OT and NT Scriptures. I have never been of that opinion.

I learned the subject from a book [b]"A General Introd ...[text shortened]... Dr. Bart Erhman and Dr. James White on this ? Its worth your while IMO.

[b] - sonship [/b]

OK I'll defer to Dive's focus on the question of literalism, instead of a focus on copyists' typos.

Is a major tenet of Christianity that Bible passages that can be taken to heart as allegories, should instead or in addition, be taken as reporting historic fact? I am thinking of talking serpents and the like.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Are there ANY Christians in this forum with the courage, fortitude, honesty...to state wether or not they think the entire bible is literal, if not how do you decide which is which?

Thanks guys... 🙂

Of course it's literal.

Even where it is allegorical, metaphorical, figurative or parable.

Are you sure you understand what literal means as it relates to the narrative of God's Word?

Don't try to decide for the purpose of picking and choosing which parts to believe or not. Allow it to speak to you, and then listen. God has preserved His Word. Trust your Bible. Jesus said five times, four in Matthew and once in Luke, that there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth".

No metaphorical language there. It's literal.

Originally posted by @josephw
What writing implement are you referring to? Oh, I see, the one from your imagination you threw into the mix.

The writing implement for literally writing stuff that you believe will literally be written in "the book". If there's no writing implement, then do you believe the idea that there will be stuff 'written in a book' is just allegorical?

Originally posted by @josephw
Of course it's literal.

Even where it is allegorical, metaphorical, figurative or parable.

Are you sure you understand what literal means as it relates to the narrative of God's Word?

You seem to think that "literal" and "allegorical", "metaphorical", and "figurative" are all synonymous. They are not. On top of that, you seem to think that "literal" and "believable" are synonyms. But they are not.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
How do you explain our sinful nature if the fall of man was not literal?

Humans' "sinful" nature and the "fall of man" can be depicted and explained - and has been very successfully - using an allegory featuring two humans, a garden, a tree, a serpent, and an apple. This does not mean humans' "sinful" nature and the "fall of man" are not literally true.

Originally posted by @fmf
The writing implement for literally writing stuff that you believe will literally be written in "the book". If there's no writing implement, then do you believe the idea that there will be stuff 'written in a book' is just allegorical?

Well, maybe you're right. Since angels are ministering spirits, I'm assuming their the ones doing the writing, and since we know they are really big dudes I think it's safe to assume that they probably use #2 lead pencils the size of redwood trees. Real trees. Not allegorical ones.