quote:Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
The Helio Biblio 'contradicts' itself because it is myth that is not supposed to be taken literally.
Oshun, I have to disagree with you here, at least for now. The studying I've been doing of the Bible over the past year is leading me to the conclusion that the writers and the compilers did indeed mean for the Bible to be taken as the literal word of God. I come to that conclusion because older passages that couldn't possibly be literally true are referred to by later books in the Bible in terms that make it clear that the writer of the later believed in the literal truth of the earlier text. I don't have cites handy, but New Testament books refer to Adam and Eve, for example.
I have a long way to go, but from what it's starting to look like to me, the idea that this stuff wasn't meant to be taken literally sounds like it evolved in response to science and enlightenment, as a way for the church to retain its relevance.
This is one reason I have rejected the Bible, and Christianity (though certainly not Jesus) along with it.