Re: slightly OT, but still connected

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:09:45 -0400, Roland Roberts
<roland@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>I have problems with the phrase "literal interpretation of ... the
>Bible" in general...

Well, without getting into a long discussion about Biblical
interpretation, I think it is fair to say (in the context of this
debate) that we are talking mainly about the literal interpretation of
simple, physical, scientifically verifiable things that appear not to be
intended as poetry or allegory. This includes things such as the age of
the Earth, the manner of creation of the Earth, the manner of creation
of Man, events such as the Biblical plagues and Noah's flood.

These are things that, if taken literally as presented in the Bible (as
is common with fundamental Christians in the United States), are at odds
with scientific knowledge. That is the sort of gross dichotomy I'm
talking about- nothing subtle!

And to be clear again, what I'm discussing has nothing to do in general
with the relationship between science and religion, and everything to do
with specific items presented as "fact" or "truth" by some religious
practitioners and which are scientifically unsound.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Pope on Creation comment
    ... >The Pope on Creation ... >project" and criticizing those who say its creation was without direction. ... >The pope focused on scriptural readings that said God's love was seen in the ... granted the literal interpretation of creation in six days, ...
    (soc.religion.christian)
  • Re: OT: the world thinks you are morons
    ... i'm talking about the 4000 year old earth, world created in 7 days, ... adam and eve in the garden, literal interpretation people. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
Loading