Debate with a Christian

[Wyrd of Gawd]

You are not versed in ancient literature yet you assert emphatically that the New Testament which is a compilation of ancient literature, is fiction!?

If you are not versed in ancient literature, then why are making assertions about ancient literature which you no doubt wish me to take as truth?

That is akin to me saying I am not versed in Big Bang cosmology and then with my very next breath state that the Big Bang is a load of rubbish.

Surely you would jump at the opportunity to highlight this inconsistency no?

Curious...
It jumps.

Of that particular collection of books, I know enough to dismiss it as mostly fiction, yes.
I mean, really...
- bringing dead people back to life?
- Producing multiples of bread and fish without extra flour nor actual fishing?
- Healing an incurable (at the time) disease?
- Walking on water?
- A person lashed, nailed to a pole and stabbed... somehow survives?

Does this belong in the History or fiction aisle?

When reading the Bible a person should always remember that he's reading an ethnocentric Jewish religious fairy tale that uses a lot of metaphors. If a reader doesn't consider the metaphors he will miss the meaning of the story.

A spiritually dead person can be brought back to life if he repents and gives up his "sinful"habits. Consider the Prodigal Son story in Luke chapter 15. It ends with the father saying (Luke 15:32 CJB) = "We had to celebrate and rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead but has come back to life — he was lost but has been found.’”

In Matthew 22:29:32 is Jesus talking about the physically dead or the spiritually dead being resurrected? http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...B;CJB;NKJV

The two stories about the bread and fish feeding thousands are stories about hospitality and feeding the hungry. The Bible has countless stories about people throwing out the welcome mat for strangers and feeding and sheltering them. In these particular stories Jesus and his pals are out in the countryside with thousands of people far from the greasy spoons.

So everyone is getting hungry but Jesus and his pals only have enough for themselves. The crowds appear to be running on empty. The rules of hospitality required that you offer your guests food before you ate in their presence. So Jesus told his guys to walk out into the crowds with their lunch in plain sight and offer it to the people. Since there were thousands of people it was obvious that that was not a sustainable plan.

But what happened was that everyone had brought his own lunch, hidden in their dusty robes. Once the crowd saw that it was OK to bring out their own lunches they did and everyone chowed down. People did not go out in the countryside without taking something to eat. They might have been dumb but there was a limit to their stupidity. So in the end each person fed himself and some even had so much that there was a lot left over.

The story about walking on water is interesting because water is a metaphor for "truth". When Jesus walked on water he was being supported by the truth. Peter was able to walk on water for a few steps but then he failed. That ties in to the story about how he refused to acknowledge Jesus after Jesus was betrayed (Matthew chapter 26).

What do you think the stories about the incurable disease and crucifixion mean?