re: #360 Naso Tang

I am well aware of that, but “the Bible is not meant to be interpreted literally” suggests evidence for an implied command of a very broad nature. That is not the same thing as disagreement about this or that interpretation of a sentence, word, letter, comma after countless language translations.

Lemme rephrase that before I get taken too, well, literally…

Rev. Spong is saying that it makes no sense to intepret the Bible literally, as it is a) full of contradictions within itself, b) it was written at a time when people’s understanding of the workings of nature and human psychology were very different from ours, and that c) many parts of the Bible (Job, Ruth, Jonah and the Parables of Christ) were written as fiction and merrely served to illustrate various points or debates on belief and doctrine.