...it would be a shift away from the idea that holy books are "the word of god" and towards the idea that they are "[ancient] man's interpretation of god".
The first idea I see as incredibly dangerous. No matter how liberal people act, and how much they interpret all the bad bits out in their head, if they pass on the message that the book should be taken as literally true without question, then some people will do so. Calling them extremists for doing exactly what they are told to do is what makes me shake my head in despair.
The second I think is a much more sensible, rational, safer and accurate description. It also actually fits in with the current trend (which I'm very thankful for) of picking and choosing from the books. If this message was passed onto children, rather than the dogmatic idea that the text can't be questioned, I think things would be better for everyone. I wish people would be encouraged to interpret the texts themselves and to find their own meanings, rather than be told what it means.
If you are telling someone that parts of a book aren't meant to be taken literally, or simply ignoring parts of the book because they "don't apply", then it doesn't make sense to me that you would also tell them it's the perfect word of god. This is bound to be totally confusing and to produce unpredictable results.
I would be interested to know people's opinions on this, and for the theists, which statement best represents how they view the books.
The first idea I see as incredibly dangerous. No matter how liberal people act, and how much they interpret all the bad bits out in their head, if they pass on the message that the book should be taken as literally true without question, then some people will do so. Calling them extremists for doing exactly what they are told to do is what makes me shake my head in despair.
The second I think is a much more sensible, rational, safer and accurate description. It also actually fits in with the current trend (which I'm very thankful for) of picking and choosing from the books. If this message was passed onto children, rather than the dogmatic idea that the text can't be questioned, I think things would be better for everyone. I wish people would be encouraged to interpret the texts themselves and to find their own meanings, rather than be told what it means.
If you are telling someone that parts of a book aren't meant to be taken literally, or simply ignoring parts of the book because they "don't apply", then it doesn't make sense to me that you would also tell them it's the perfect word of god. This is bound to be totally confusing and to produce unpredictable results.
I would be interested to know people's opinions on this, and for the theists, which statement best represents how they view the books.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
