Joe is stuck in the same rut of Jesuscentrism that wants certain statements and stories taken alegorically, then claims the same scripture will be literally fulfilled "soon". If it was a metaphore then, the fullfillment now would have to be equally metaphorical, no? Well anyway, it isn't surprising that stories told over and over became hagiographically exaggerated to the point that they have lost any semblance of applical meaning. Attempting to prove that the bible is contradictory plays into the same ploy of time wasting.I'm not sure what your position is on this, Carmel. I believe that many of the stories in the Bible are allegories, stories which are not literally true, but which contain a moral or other teaching. There are many on this list, however, who insist that the words in the Bible--all of them--utimately came from God, and are therefore the "Word of God." I think we can count Larsguy, AChristian, and Faithful among them. I'm trying to disabuse these folks of this notion by showing them that it is absurd to hold this view. I pointed to 1 Samuel 15:1-3, where the Lord orders that infants and suckling babes be killed, as an example of a Bible passage that should not be taken literally. How could an all-loving god kill babies suckling their mothers? It's ridiculous to suppose that the Lord--if it exists--actually did what the 1 Samuel author said he did. AChristian and Faithful refuse to tell the forum what they believe, so I'll ask you.
Do you think the 1 Samuel story is literally true, or do you think that the writer was mistaken? Do you think the stories about Jesus are literally true, and if so, why?
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"