Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Angrillori · 12-08-2005, 10:06 AM

Well you see, the bible is always true, unless it's sooooooo batshit insane that no one in their right mind would call it literally true, then it's metaphor. Of course, right up until it's been proven to be batshit insane, it's actually true. It's only metaphor after it's been proven to be batshit insane.

Since some people have different notions as to what constitutes "soooooooo batshit insane that no one in their right mind would call it literally true," we get some interesting scenarios. For example, we do still see flat earthers insisting (contrary to buckshot) that the biblical passages necessitating a flat earth are in fact two words:
1. Literally
2. True.

This gives us an interesting bit of a clarifying example.

If there are still people claiming (contrary to buckshot) that those passages are:
1. Literally
2. True
even though more enlightened folks, like Buckshot, contend they are
1. Not
2. Literal,
then we just need to understand that flat-earth-literalists are just as batshit-insane appearing to Buckshot as Buckshot is to anyone knowledgeable in science*.

We can see the bible in re: evolution as non-literal while he can't, just as he can see the bible in re: flat-earth as non literal while the flat-earth society cannot.

*APPEARING folks, APPEARING. I'm not saying anything about his ACTUAL mental state, just how it appears to outsiders. APPEARING!

I don't quite understand it either, and no mechanism has ever been proposed to demonstrate how one minute something is actually literally true but then the next minute, upon scientific discovery of a passage's falsehood, becomes metaphor. I imagine leprechuans are involved somehow.

Mageth · 12-08-2005, 10:15 AM

What puzzles me is when something like the temptation of Jesus by Satan is declared "NOT LITERAL" because it's so "batshit insane" and violates what we now know (that it's impossible to see the entire world from the top of a hill), yet events like Jesus walking on water or re-animating someone after several days of decomposition must be literal!

judanne · 12-08-2005, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Angrillori
Well, I think that's got a similar gradient to flat-earthism and creationism. We would just have guys like Former Bishop Spong on the side of the miracles being metaphoric, and most christians on the side of their literalism. (Though the number of miracle-metaphor-ists is definitely growing!)

See:

All literal........................................... ......................... ..All Metaphoric
|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
|--Flat Earthers--|
...............|--This thread starter--|
.............................|-----Buckshot-----|
.................................................. ...........|---Spong---|
.................................................. ......................... ..........|Angrillori|

This is the same chart that would show to what extent people think things qualify as "sooooooo batshit insane you can't believe it's true."

Flat earthers hold the flat earth verses to not pass that threshold.
Buckshot thinks those DO cross that threshold, but the evolution and miracle stuff doesn't.
Spong thinks all the miraculous stories cross that threshold, but things like the existence of jesus and the historical stories may not.
Me? I think the whole book surpasses the batshit insane threshold.

This is the portion of Agrillori's post that was more appropriate BC&H.

judanne · 12-08-2005, 12:15 PM

Dear Toto and our friends down the hall in BC&H,

We sincerely hope you won't be offended but we find it necessary to return a portion of your most generous gift to us. It simply didn't fit well in E/C. We do hope you kept the receipts.

judanne, E/C Moderator

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-08-2005, 10:06 AM	#11
Angrillori Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: A world less bright without WinAce. Posts: 7,482	Well you see, the bible is always true, unless it's sooooooo batshit insane that no one in their right mind would call it literally true, then it's metaphor. Of course, right up until it's been proven to be batshit insane, it's actually true. It's only metaphor after it's been proven to be batshit insane. Since some people have different notions as to what constitutes "soooooooo batshit insane that no one in their right mind would call it literally true," we get some interesting scenarios. For example, we do still see flat earthers insisting (contrary to buckshot) that the biblical passages necessitating a flat earth are in fact two words: 1. Literally 2. True. This gives us an interesting bit of a clarifying example. If there are still people claiming (contrary to buckshot) that those passages are: 1. Literally 2. True even though more enlightened folks, like Buckshot, contend they are 1. Not 2. Literal, then we just need to understand that flat-earth-literalists are just as batshit-insane appearing to Buckshot as Buckshot is to anyone knowledgeable in science. We can see the bible in re: evolution as non-literal while he can't, just as he can see the bible in re: flat-earth as non literal while the flat-earth society cannot. APPEARING folks, APPEARING. I'm not saying anything about his ACTUAL mental state, just how it appears to outsiders. APPEARING! I don't quite understand it either, and no mechanism has ever been proposed to demonstrate how one minute something is actually literally true but then the next minute, upon scientific discovery of a passage's falsehood, becomes metaphor. I imagine leprechuans are involved somehow.

12-08-2005, 10:15 AM	#12
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	What puzzles me is when something like the temptation of Jesus by Satan is declared "NOT LITERAL" because it's so "batshit insane" and violates what we now know (that it's impossible to see the entire world from the top of a hill), yet events like Jesus walking on water or re-animating someone after several days of decomposition must be literal!

12-08-2005, 12:15 PM	#14
judanne Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: near Toronto Posts: 1,757	Dear Toto and our friends down the hall in BC&H, We sincerely hope you won't be offended but we find it necessary to return a portion of your most generous gift to us. It simply didn't fit well in E/C. We do hope you kept the receipts. judanne, E/C Moderator

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.