(November 8, 2015 at 9:01 pm)houseofcantor Wrote:(November 8, 2015 at 8:15 pm)drfuzzy Wrote: Um . . . whut? Sorry, cantor, but you just went WAY over my head somehow. Maybe I drop IQ points on the days I play for Mass. (uh oh!) Could you, maybe, rephrase that - - like you would explain it to a 12-year old, please? It sounds pretty but I don't quite follow . . .
Sorry, it's a Gwynnie thing.
The thing about Elijah ain't about feeding a real person firstly so much as it is about feeding Spirit, in the sense that before material consequence can be addressed immaterial consequence must be considered. Like if we're in a rush to feed our starving children we might just knock the neighbor upside the head and take his bread. Of course, that's the prophet spin on the deal.
The message that a representative of the church should be valued over family is also included for the skeptic.
All scripture, regardless of who spins it up, contains these inherent dualities.
Oh right, thank you. Believers in the inerrancy of the Bible will always flip to a "you're not supposed to take it literally!" stance as soon as you pull out one of these thousands of examples. It's not literal, it's an allegory. It's not about literal food, it's about spiritual food. It doesn't mean what it says because ________.
As I understand it, there are whole degree paths in seminaries on apologetics - studying how to tell bible readers that it doesn't mean what it says, here's what it REALLY means, because I have a degree. There has been a long-standing tradition of "only the priests know what it means". That's why they fought so hard against translations of the bible in the common language of the people. That means they had to work to elevate their level of bullshit.
It's still bullshit, based on fairy tales that are bullshit.
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein
