Quote:
Originally posted by GrumpyCoder
You imply that one of these options is MORE rational than the other. Your missing the fact that the two concepts presented here are to extremes on a spectrum. It is possible to be rational about your faith and still take the Bible literally.
I see God as an all knowing entity. I don't think God is an old breaded man on a cloud, BUT I do take most of the Bible literally. Before you jump on the word "most" (which commonly happens to me), you have to remember that the Bible is not a single book or single work. It is a collection of writings with a collection of writing styles (historical, poetic, allegory). For example, where Jesus' parables literal stories that actually happened or were they scenerios to illustrate a point? I believe you miss the purpose if you bother asking the question.
My point: I can not speak for other religions, but it is possible to be a rational thinker and have faith in Christianity.
|
I think for most people, "taking the bible literally" is really a euphamism for believing in a six day creation, a man who fed a croud of hundreds with a couple of fish and a handfull of loaves, a man who turned lead into gold...eh, I mean water into wine. etc.
Obviously parables like The Good Samaratin and The Prodigal son etc. are only meant to be pure fiction.
And yes, there are degrees of rationality. At one end of the spectrum lies absolutely rational: atheism and agnostisim, slightly beyond that lies the belief in an undefined supreme being, beyond that lies the christian who realises that the stories in the bible are pure myth, but do carry a genuine message, and at the furthest end of the spectrum lies "pure" christianity, who believe the bible word for word, and believe it to be infallable.