by jimwalton » Sun May 06, 2018 5:57 pm
Well, I'm not a fundamentalist, but I don't accept that the Bible is full of inconsistencies. I'd be glad to talk about it. As far as literal, it's the wrong word for the subject at hand. The Bible is a rich literary collection containing music, poetry, metaphor, allegory, archetypes, parable, hyperbole, metonymy, irony, simile, and many other literary forms, as well as genres such as prayer, prophecy, blessing, covenant language, legal language, etc. "Literally" quickly becomes a word with very little meaning or helpfulness. If a poet says the trees of the field will clap their hands and the mountains will jump for joy, is that literal? Of course not, it's poetry. If a man prays, "God, kill all those people", we may all understand that his prayer is inappropriate, and is not blessed by God, but is it literal? Well, how does that word even apply? And how does it apply to archetype, allegory, parable, and all the others? It's a word that should be dropped from the discussion because it doesn't take us anywhere except to the Land of Misunderstanding.
It's better to think that the Bible should be taken the way the author intended it to be taken. If he was using hyperbole, we're to take it that way. So also allegorically, historically, parabolic, poetic, etc. Our quest is to understand the intent of the author. In that case we'll take the Bible *seriously*, but "literally" doesn't take us anywhere.
Errors? We'd have to talk. What errors?
And, by the way, if you want to talk about inconsistencies and errors, don't just link me to some trash site on the Internet. I've looked at many of these and they are laughable. If you want to have a conversation, let's have a real conversation.