A discussion around family table.

[Watson]

Then there is no point in arguing with you, SN, because you are refusing to take a look at our Christian interpretation of the Christian Bible.

You have literally just stated that you willfully choose not to look into a metaphorical interpretation of any kind of the Bible. This is not logical. Do you not look for metaphors in any other book when you read them? Do you take it lierally when, say, the villain of a book advocates some terrible crime as meaning that the author of that book also advocates the crime? Certainly that's a terrible way to read a book.

Why would I waste time trying to counter all the many re-interpretations? I only care about that on an individual basis, and even then only sometimes. For wider than just one person purposes, I'm going right to the source, the bible, which very clearly does not say 'this one is a metaphor, and that one is real'.

It does say that the Bible is a metaphor...in a metaphorical way. You must read into it to actually see and understand the metaphor. I have told you, the Bible is written in such a way as to allude to a metaphor. That's how you recognize metaphors, you know. Again, when you read a book, do you discern every single character's views to be that of the author? If so, you must have a very negative view of some authors...

Say a book is about a species of lizards that take over the planet, but the underlying theme is a metaphor for communism. Do you simply read the book as being about a species of lizards that take over the planet, or do you read deeper, the way you are supposed to with books, and find the underlying communism metaphor?

I have told you to re-observe the way the Bible is written- it lacks the details of an ordinary, literal-meaning book.

Well, it is rather bad as far as artistic literary aesthetics, but that's not my point. Followers will not be saying 'this one must be a metaphor, since after all, look how non-ordinary the writing is...' You may be different, but Christians in general are expected to believe the stuff written in their bible.

And I do believe in the stuff written in the Bible- not as literal stories, but as lessons meant to be read and learned from. I believe in the lessons themselves, because reading deeper, they are awfully important life lessons, most of them. Some followers, the smart ones, will be saying this. You are trying to argue with a fundamentalists perspective of the Bible, when that is not what I am giving you at all.

It is written specifically in the way of a metaphor, and is clearly meant to be interpreted as such. Now, siimply because some morons interpret it some ways which seem very literal and/or foolish, does not mean those morons' interpretations are correct. There are many right-minded Christians/theists, as I said, who are appalled at notions like the Fundamentalist God interpretation and all of its meanings.

Then, please show me these specifics which show it to be metaphorical. Also, unless these vague 'specifics' indicate that the whole thing, including God, is just a metaphor, then I will also need to see where it says which parts are metaphors.

Again, it says they are metaphors by the self-evident nature of metaphors. You do not need to be told the book about lizards taking over the world is a metaphor for communism- it simply is a metaphor for communism.

You claim that if the entire Bible is metaphorical, then that must mean God is metaphorical, too. Not so. The Bible is a series of stories which are metaphors for God and His lessons and His nature. You seem to think Christianity, Christian beliefs, and the Christian God all must come from the Bible. Again, not so.

My faith is very heavily based on my interpretation and observation of the real world. My interpretation of the Bible then, too, is based on what I have learned from the real world. I also base my knowledge of God on experiences and observations made from the real world- at least, my subjective experience of it[the real world].

But that God is clearly not real, or we'd be looking at an awfully traumatizing world, wouldn't we?

Yeah, that's kind of my point. Setting aside though whether he's real, do you think highly of his morals? Do you worship him due to being truly infatuated and in love with him, or because you are ordered to?

I am indeed truly in love with God. You seem to think that means I am speaking about a literal Biblical interpretation of God, and I state a third time: not so. To understand my beliefs and my faith, you must first understand God. Something Atheists are simply incapable of doing.

You mention that the Bible is the 'inspired word of God' in your post, and to some degree I have come to find that phrase an obnoxious one. It has continually misleadmany a Christian and atheist for some time now. When you look at that, you are assuming that it means the Bible is literally God's word, written down by people who heard it of Him. Wen I look at the term 'inspired word of God', I believe that it means the Bible is a book written by human men, inspired by God and God's 'word' as they understood it.

I'll stop mocking its so called inspiration when xtians stop claiming it IS magically inspired. If you don't believe it's inspired by some deity, and that mere humans wrote it, then why is it given divine status among xtians? If it is not inspired, why do you believe the claims of magic inside?

I believe it is inspired by God; I don't believe it is written by God. I will try to rephrase this: the way a movie can be 'inspired by true events', so to is the Bible inspired by God. It is a book written about God by men. They may not portray everything accurately, they may not protray everything honestly; but what they are attempting to portray is still something they believe in and have encountered- somethig they have been inspired by.

I hope that makes more sense.

The term 'Word' here does not mean a literal word of mouth. Once again, you must read into it, and be smart enough to apply your own life-learnings to it to understand the meaning of the 'Word.'

Yeah, yeah, nothing's literal, sure, sure. Except when conveniently fitting in with what you want to believe anyways. I guess I've heard it before. 'That one doesn't count, it's a metaphor, and that one has a different context because of the year it was then, and that one is real - if you question it you will go to hell.....' Until all of you claiming to be christians can agree on what is metaphorical, and can show why this is the case, I must assume that the authours of the bible intended it to be believed the way it is written.

And once more; any right-minded Christian or theist will tell you that the Bible is not to be applied to real life; life is to be applied to the Bible, and then and only the is the Bible supposed to be re-applied to life. Because then and only then will the Bible begin to make sense. Any right-minded Christian or theist will tell you that the Bible is a collection of allegorical and metaphorical stories meant to embody God and spread His teachings in ways that we humans can understand. It is a book about God; not of God, at least not exactly.