Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tpaine
Rather than trying to understand the historical situation in which the books of the Bible were written and the literary styles they employ, fundamentalists believe that their English translations of the Bible must be understood literally, that is, the surface meaning must be accepted as true, word for word.

What kind of MORON thinks that English translations of the Bible must be understood literally?? I am exceedingly fundamentalist, and I have NEVER, EVER heard anyone claim this.

Do Catholics have so little ability to refute actual Fundamentalist, Bible-believing views that they must make up phony beliefs to argue against??

15 posted on 08/08/2002 1:33:30 PM PDT by Onelifetogive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Onelifetogive
Actually, many Catholics are very scholarly and spend years and years studying scripture.
20 posted on 08/08/2002 1:37:09 PM PDT by eaglebeak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Onelifetogive
Do Catholics have so little ability to refute actual Fundamentalist, Bible-believing views that they must make up phony beliefs to argue against??
_________________________________
Sorry for the late reply: --

-- I purposely left out the religious parts of his article, because I can't defend them. -- I will defend the portions that I posted. Thanks.

32 posted on 08/08/2002 3:51:07 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Onelifetogive
I too am a fundamentalist and agree with your assessment. Everyone I know spends lots of time studying the original languages, various translations and commentaries on scripture, and studies about the culture and historical background of the scriptures.

Yes, the scriptures are the literal Word of God, but they are also written by men for men. I don't know of anyone who believes God is a rock (Psalm 18:2), a door (John 10:7), nor any of the other figurative descriptions of Him.

Modern day fundamentalism is an extreme reaction to the complexity and immorality of today's world. The knowledge and technology explosion has left many people confused and afraid. Their understandable longing for security leads some to look for a way to cut through the complexities of modern life and reestablish fundamental truths. Fundamentalists try to satisfy their "lust for certitude" by oversimplifying things, by making a passionate commitment to a part, and sometimes to a distortion, of the truth.

I don't think so. I know fundamentalists who are fighter pilots, Green Berets, computer-system designers, doctors, and change-management experts. They don't fear change. Many of us thrive on change. If it is good change.

Fundamentalists know that there is a thing called Truth. And that truths build upon Truth. If the foundation of a building is corrupt, the building is corrupt and will not stand. The same with civilizations, individuals, and businesses. If their beliefs are correctly built upon Truth, they will be truth. (Sometimes we have incorrectly built upon Truth, with disastrous results. Also, sometimes we have built upon lies, thinking we were building upon Truth. Again, this leads to disastrous results.

36 posted on 08/08/2002 4:29:13 PM PDT by gitmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Onelifetogive
What kind of MORON thinks that English translations of the Bible must be understood literally?? I am exceedingly fundamentalist, and I have NEVER, EVER heard anyone claim this.

Actually you're misunderstanding what is meant by literal. It is not talking about literal vs. figurative speech. Literal Interpretation means that you are faithful to the author's intended message, not treating it as an allegory where you read into it whatever meaning you wish.

There was a time with the ancient Church where people sought to find allegorical meanings to scripture. So the meaning of a passage, depending on who was reading it, not what the author wrote. Literal interpretation means that we seek to determine the author's intended meaning, by studing the context, and applying the proper rules of grammer to it. We do not ignore metaphor, or symbolism, we attempt to find the author's intended meaning for it, rather than choosing one of our preference.

57 posted on 08/08/2002 6:33:54 PM PDT by Sci Fi Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson