[Natural Law]

"Most people I know who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible don’t ascribe the type of “literalism” that you are implying."

Not being a literalist I have a hard time understanding where those who can arbitrarily apply their own threshold for literalcy, but denounce as heretics anyone whose threshold differs. How do you determine that deviation from the text is OK when reaching a logical conclusion that Jesus was not an actual Lamb or that the sun didn't actually rise, but advocate stoning those who don't believe that creation took place in six 24 hour days?

[Boogieman]

“How do you determine that deviation from the text is OK when reaching a logical conclusion that Jesus was not an actual Lamb or that the sun didn’t actually rise”

Because the good Lord gave me common sense.

“but advocate stoning those who don’t believe that creation took place in six 24 hour days?”

Who is advocating stoning? Did some Mohameddan sneak on the thread and I missed it?

[tpanther]

Not being a literalist I have a hard time understanding where those who can arbitrarily apply their own threshold for literalcy, but denounce as heretics anyone whose threshold differs. How do you determine that deviation from the text is OK when reaching a logical conclusion that Jesus was not an actual Lamb or that the sun didn't actually rise, but advocate stoning those who don't believe that creation took place in six 24 hour days?

Fascinating! We see, (on 9-11 no less)...the "Christian taliban" drivel, and now: "stoning those who don't believe that creation took place in six 24 hour days"?