There was a thread a while ago regarding someone having problems dealing with christians who don't take Genesis literally, going over the concept of Theistic Evolution. Some of the Americans seemed to think that christianity had to be based on the belief that Genesis was true and the central concept of Original Sin was at the heart of it.
As a Brit the idea of literalism is alien and took me a while to go over stuff to remember what the basis is for non-literalists.
So; The basis for non-literal christianity so far as I know is based on the concept of the Chosen People. For this to be held it is Exodus and the subsequent books that have to be historically accurate whilst Genesis can be discarded as metaphor.
If you can show that Jews were dishonest regarding the claims made in the OT post Genesis (and yes that means going through the archaeology through Omri and finally to Ezra) you should be able to deal more effectively with non-literal christians.
As a Brit the idea of literalism is alien and took me a while to go over stuff to remember what the basis is for non-literalists.
So; The basis for non-literal christianity so far as I know is based on the concept of the Chosen People. For this to be held it is Exodus and the subsequent books that have to be historically accurate whilst Genesis can be discarded as metaphor.
If you can show that Jews were dishonest regarding the claims made in the OT post Genesis (and yes that means going through the archaeology through Omri and finally to Ezra) you should be able to deal more effectively with non-literal christians.
Quote:I don't understand why you'd come to a discussion forum, and then proceed to reap from visibility any voice that disagrees with you. If you're going to do that, why not just sit in front of a mirror and pat yourself on the back continuously?-Esquilax
Evolution - Adapt or be eaten.
