Quote Originally Posted by Polymirize
oneironaut, can you say equivocation?

I don't know why you always insist so hard on literal interpretation, unless you just think you look heroic charging at straw men.
Well, if we're to accept some things as not literal and indeed merely metaphorical or fictional, how do we separate the truth from the fiction? Where in the Bible does it say "oh, this part didn't really happen, it's just symbolic"? How can you pretend to have faith in Jesus when you know the book he appears in is at least partly fictional? Who's to say it's not all fictional? To deny the truth of part of the Bible is to cast doubt on all of Christianity. And in the absence of evidence, it is only reasonable to conclude that all those wacky assertions of miracles and messiahs are just plain false.

Again, as usual, I think I'm even with you in spirit, sort of, but geez do you have to be such an asshole all the time?
I think people who give Bibles to children are the real assholes. I mean, this is a book that encourages child murder, genocide, racism, slavery, sexism, homophobia, and other destructive qualities. We really need to recognize this book for the mythological hate literature it is. If that makes me an asshole, then fine, I guess I'm an asshole.
The fact is I've rarely seen a fundamentalist christian hardliner who insists on literal interpretation arguing with you on Cannabis.com.

* I say all this out of a sense of love *
Well, to all the non-fundamentalist Christians, this only begs the question: why do you only believe in part of the Bible? How can you believe so wholeheartedly in a messiah who appears in a work of fiction?