That’s pretty insulting, all the way around, even with your “respectfully…”beginning. But that’s ok.
I lean toward most scriptures being both literal and figurative. I can think of no other author, no other storyteller and no other being better able to weave a story/stories that transcend(s) time even as it speaks to the present.
That’s pretty insulting, all the way around, even with your “respectfully…”beginning. But that’s ok.
I lean toward most scriptures being both literal and figurative. I can think of no other author, no other storyteller and no other being better able to weave a story/stories that transcend(s) time even as it speaks to the present.
It's certainly true that scripture has both literal and figurative, and that it weaves a coherent story from start to end. I'm just suggesting that some things in there are NOT literal, but entirely figurative, metaphorical, or hyperbolic. (For instance, calling the mustard tree the "largest of plants".)
Also, my apologies if there was any unnecessary insult, though I'm not sure it's possible to say "you're wrong" without at least some degree of offense.
That’s pretty insulting, all the way around, even with your “respectfully…”beginning. But that’s ok.
I lean toward most scriptures being both literal and figurative. I can think of no other author, no other storyteller and no other being better able to weave a story/stories that transcend(s) time even as it speaks to the present.
It's certainly true that scripture has both literal and figurative, and that it weaves a coherent story from start to end. I'm just suggesting that some things in there are NOT literal, but entirely figurative, metaphorical, or hyperbolic. (For instance, calling the mustard tree the "largest of plants".)
Also, my apologies if there was any unnecessary insult, though I'm not sure it's possible to say "you're wrong" without at least some degree of offense.