Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Slavakion
Well, I've honestly only read most of exodus and the gospels. And I skimmed Revelation because 8-headed goat demons are the most amusing code I've read.
Although sometimes you have to interpret the story. I'm hesitant to say it, because I'd rather not start another argument. But what about the creation stories? Modern science has proved them not quite accurate. And I'm sure if I read through the Bible, I could find other examples. Sometimes the story is just a story. But when interpreted, you find a moral.
|
I'd worry about thread jackage, but this discussion is the best thing going here, IMO.
By story, i mean the larger text. The story of genesis is about creation. There's no header that says "scientifically accurate" or anything. It's a story. you can read it as history, but i don't think the meaning is there. it reads like poetry. God's breath (ruah or spirit) moves over the water, and calls each thing in to being.
How that becomes a science textbook is beyond me. I'm willing to admit, i may be wrong. And i would take it seriously, if on the last day i was called to account for causing the scriptures to be held in low regard.
I'll close with a quote...it deals with why many things about the bible got turned in to truth claims. he begins by asserting that for some time, myth and history operated on similar levels and were not distinct. What happened when they were separated by modernism was to put a priority on "objective" history.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by W.C. Smith
[church leaders], like their contemporaries, thought that historiography had to do with truth, but myth did not.
|