• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not [W:775]

Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

Logicman said:
If true that only means more and more Biblically-challenged nitwits will most likely be winding up in Hell.



Don't confuse education with Godly wisdom.

Reminding people that today the Bible is the biggest best-seller in history obscures one other incredible fact: The Bible is also the best selling book each and every year. It is estimated that some 72,000 Bibles are sold every day, with an estimated 26 million sold annually.

And what replaces the Bible? The lies and folly of liberalism and the continued lack of any credible, peer-reviewed scientific studies that prove God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist.

And to this day, after all the sophomoric attacks and attempts to diminish or negate it, the resurrection accounts of Jesus Christ in the New Testament have still not been discredited or falsified.

Jesus is Lord!
Click to expand...

There is a theology forum.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

Logicman said:
LOL. What did you liberals dredge up but the illicit scourge from Sodom and Gomorrah some 3,000 + years ago.



I think those are pretty much the same people who think liberalism and socialism work.
Click to expand...

News flash! Liberalism is the basis of the US government. Conservatives wanted to preserve the monarchy.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

Quag said:
I have already provided you with a non supernatural explanation for the resurrection
You have failed to provide any evidence to support a supernatural explanation
Your failed attempt at reversing the burden of proof is a complete failure.
The only explanation for your continued promoting of the massive failure is that your are in fact a POE and hate Christianity because no one tries harder at making Christians look foolish than you. But even at that you fail as no one judges Christians based on your nonsense.
Click to expand...

Christians are very lucky that Logicman's views are seen by most as an extreme version, and not considered mainstream. God couldn't have chosen a worse PR man.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

<alt>doxygen said:
Here's the rub : The people that DO believe the Bible is the literal word of God, and that it's completely historically accurate have attained a lot of political power and money. Mike Pence is one of them. Trump has been stacking the courts with believers. Look up the views of Gorsuch. That's a lot of power to bend laws right there.
Click to expand...

That is scary.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

devildavid said:
Christians are very lucky that Logicman's views are seen by most as an extreme version, and not considered mainstream. God couldn't have chosen a worse PR man.
Click to expand...

God didn't choose him.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

holbritter said:
What does it matter to you if someone has faith or are spiritual or not. Why can't people just leave one another alone and let them believe what they want? Who says it's irrational, you? Who are you, to decide that for someone else?

I don't believe as you do, therefore you are irrational. Sounds reasonable. :roll:
Click to expand...

What is spiritual? What does it mean? You believe something. I don't hold any belief.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

<alt>doxygen said:
Here's the rub : The people that DO believe the Bible is the literal word of God, and that it's completely historically accurate have attained a lot of political power and money. Mike Pence is one of them. Trump has been stacking the courts with believers. Look up the views of Gorsuch. That's a lot of power to bend laws right there.
Click to expand...

And God is watching...and the time is coming when God will not tolerate hypocritical Christians any more than He will the outwardly wicked...
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

Logicman said:
If true that only means more and more Biblically-challenged nitwits will most likely be winding up in Hell.



Don't confuse education with Godly wisdom.

Reminding people that today the Bible is the biggest best-seller in history obscures one other incredible fact: The Bible is also the best selling book each and every year. It is estimated that some 72,000 Bibles are sold every day, with an estimated 26 million sold annually.

And what replaces the Bible? The lies and folly of liberalism and the continued lack of any credible, peer-reviewed scientific studies that prove God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist.

And to this day, after all the sophomoric attacks and attempts to diminish or negate it, the resurrection accounts of Jesus Christ in the New Testament have still not been discredited or falsified.

Jesus is Lord!
Click to expand...

And those accounts have never been proven or credited either. It's difficult to prove a fact. Much more difficult to prove a negative. Impossible to prove something where there is no evidence it ever existed.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

devildavid said:
What is spiritual? What does it mean? You believe something. I don't hold any belief.
Click to expand...

Answer the questions please.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

Sweden said:
Religion is a hangover from a primative pre-scientific age. As knowledge waxes religion wanes. Do you deny that as civilisation has progressed and spread so has religious belief been gradually consigned to history?

I treasure our old Swedish churches, often with their 14th cent painted interiors, as monuments to a bygone age. But an ignorant and superstitious age which I am glad I have not lived in.
Click to expand...

I'm very much hoping that your view isn't as proud and patronizing as you represent it to be here. Perhaps my opinion has little value because I am one of those knuckledragging primitives who is a person of faith, but in my view, it's way too early to smugly congratulate those who have "evolved" past faith for all their great secular progress.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

holbritter said:
Answer the questions please.
Click to expand...

I don't care if someone claims to have faith or says they are spiritual. But I want an explanation of what it means. The claims always seem to imply that there is something special about faith and spirituality. What is so special about it?
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

HowardBThiname said:
If you consider the Bible to be the literal word of God -- you're in declining company.

For the past 50 years, Americans have been slowly but decidedly choosing to view the Bible as not the literal word of God. I knew about the correlation between education and religious belief, but I wasn't aware of the racial correlation. Where are you in this picture?


https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-secular-life/201705/bible-belief-in-decline
Click to expand...

This is something that's pretty weird if you ask me. The notion that the bible should be read literally in the sense that people mean that today (that is, as pertaining to historical time) is an idea that is only about 150 years old, and that only in the last 60 or 70 years became popular. The usual schema of interpretation from the antique and medieval periods does include a "literal" level, but that meant only that the text could be interpreted as narrative--not as narrative that actually happened in the same way that the events we read about in the news every day happened.

But the idea that the Bible is like a history book, and that's how it's supposed to be read, has so seized debate that there's hardly any other public discussion of it. It's as if two millennia of thought about the texts of the bible just don't matter...
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

Logicman said:
If true that only means more and more Biblically-challenged nitwits will most likely be winding up in Hell.



Don't confuse education with Godly wisdom.

Reminding people that today the Bible is the biggest best-seller in history obscures one other incredible fact: The Bible is also the best selling book each and every year. It is estimated that some 72,000 Bibles are sold every day, with an estimated 26 million sold annually.

And what replaces the Bible? The lies and folly of liberalism and the continued lack of any credible, peer-reviewed scientific studies that prove God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist.

And to this day, after all the sophomoric attacks and attempts to diminish or negate it, the resurrection accounts of Jesus Christ in the New Testament have still not been discredited or falsified.

Jesus is Lord!
Click to expand...

People are not going to hell because they don't believe Adam was a real man or they don't believe the Earth was created 6,000 years ago.
Neither are essential doctrine.

People can embrace the concept that the universe was created by God and that man is inherently a sinner without taking everything in the Bible literally.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

upsideguy said:
People are not going to hell because they don't believe Adam was a real man or they don't believe the Earth was created 6,000 years ago.
Neither are essential doctrine.

People can embrace the concept that the universe was created by God and that man is inherently a sinner without taking everything in the Bible literally.
Click to expand...

Unless they repent and have Christ as their Savior, they're lost. If they don't believe the Bible they won't believe that.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

jimbo said:
And those accounts have never been proven or credited either. It's difficult to prove a fact. Much more difficult to prove a negative. Impossible to prove something where there is no evidence it ever existed.
Click to expand...

The preponderance of the evidence substantiates the accounts of Jesus Christ in the Gospels.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

devildavid said:
News flash! Liberalism is the basis of the US government. Conservatives wanted to preserve the monarchy.
Click to expand...

Liberalism is a scourge to humanity. It screws everything up royally.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

btthegreat said:
Yes atheists manage to find their moral center and formulate a set of values and ethical stances without a God's help.
Click to expand...

So what? Satan has his view without God's help too.
 
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

HowardBThiname said:
If you consider the Bible to be the literal word of God -- you're in declining company.
Click to expand...

See, this is your liberal strawman argument - conveniently using the term "literally."

No Christian I know thinks God has wings or feathers as in Psalm 91, or that Satan is a literal dragon.

There's tons of symbolism in the Bible and in a great many cases, the Bible explains itself. Of course that will all be lost on the spiritually and Biblically-challenged knuckleheads and those who are too lazy to dig in and do their due diligence. I wonder how many of these Bible deniers have ever read a book on Bible symbolism? Hardly any, I would think.

I've yet to meet a Christian who doesn't believe Jesus was crucified and resurrected. Maybe there's a few out there, but I wouldn't call them Christians.
 
Last edited:
Re: Taking the Bible Literally -- Or Not

Casper said:
Science has proven that the Bible should not always be taken literally, many stories in the OT are meant as teaching tools for people if the time to understand the lesson. Does not mean the message is wrong.
Click to expand...

Okay, I get that. So, your position is that the Bible is not literal but that it contains a valuable message. I find that to be a reasonable, intelligent take on the subject. Thomas Jefferson had a similar take. He dismissed the OT, which I agree with, but then he rewrote the NT (you can find online copies, it's called the Jefferson Bible) and he removed all the hocus-pocus -- all the supernatural stuff -- and at the end, he had them putting Jesus body in the tomb, rolling the stone into place, and then walking away. No Resurrection - just a man with a message.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom