RE: God's God
April 16, 2013 at 11:56 pm
(This post was last modified: April 16, 2013 at 11:59 pm by Ryantology.)
(April 16, 2013 at 4:40 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: It is less valid because it is ill informed. It's just like a creationist arguing that the fossil record can be 'interpreted' to support a young earth. Some interpretations are more internally consistent and reflective of their cultural origins, etc. Literal minded readers of the bible sound like those annoying schoolboys that whine at the teachers saying, "But you said! You said...."
If you believe you have the authority to determine that your interpretation is more valid than mine, you are admitting that the Bible is not open for interpretation, which ignores the fact that you cannot demonstrate that your interpretation is, in any way, more valid than mine.
You call it ill-informed only because it doesn't agree with your opinions, though that is also hilarious because my interpretation of the Bible requires zero apologetics or theology, and what reason do I have to give either of those turgid practices the slightest bit of respect? I can say God is a raging maniac and it would be easy to point out straightforward examples. You can say that God is a being of righteous good and love, and you have to resort to all varieties of slapstick verbal prestidigitation in order to make it sound even slightly like you're reading the same book I am. It's like watching a battered wife try to convince people that her husband is a good guy who is misunderstood.
