/lit/ - Literature

Meant by whom and for whom ?

>>3930443
probably not. the structure and voice suggest that it's a poem rather than a historical account.

Nope, only Quran is to be taken literally since it was literally written by God.

>>3930443
Who the fuck gives a retarded flying faggot? There's more meaning in Nietzche's asshole than anything in the Bible and he's a fucking shitty philosopher
>inb4 EDGY ATHEIST FEDORA DURR DURR XD XD WIN WIN
No faggots I hate atheism too because fuck you and die

>>3930495
So they say.

>>3930499
so what are you then, besides a shitposting tripfag?

>>3930504
Your mother's love you fucking faggot
Go drown in your own colostomy bag or some shit faggot

>>3930509
holy shit, /b/ found their way here

>>3930514
>even attempting to engage with an obvious troll

>>3930500

Of course, but for the Muslims it's a fact. Christians, especially progressive Catholics, see the Bible more as a historical document than the direct words of God.

>>3930514
No I just think Nietzsche and The Bible are both shit faggot. Also it's not exactly hard to find your way around boards idiot. /b/'s probably been here before and your dumb ass has probably been stupid enough to fall for their trolls faggot.

fuck off and get eaten and shit out and eaten again faggot

>>3930523
thats not true, they use it to justify all kinds of things in the name of god. they point to all kinds of stories and rules and tell you thats why you're going to hell

No. In the opening chapter it suggest that plant life could exist on the earth without the sun.

Primitive man knew well enough that they needed the sun for crops to grow. Hell it was one of the justifications for sun worship. No one would read this and think it was a scientific explanation for anything.

It was always meant to be taken literally, and it, indeed, always was taken literally until too many people started to question the utter nonsense that is spouted in it. It wasn't until very recently(at least the early 20th century) that most people in the western world probably believed it as fact, or if not that were taught it as fact.

In fact, when I used to go a christian school in the Netherlands as a kid nobody told me it was to be taken as just symbolic stories. I'm 20 and went to a regular protestant primary school, not even a fringe fundamentalist faction.

I would not be surprised that if someone researched it, results would show that (especially in the USA) close to a majority of the Christian population (if not an actual majority) still believes it is to be taken literally.

tl:dr Even if it isn't meant to be taken literally, a lot of people still do and only few actively advocate against taking it literally.

>>3930537
Do you feel euphoric right now?

>>3930603
le epic may may! XD

>>3930603
what a great post 10/10 you sure showed me

>>3930603

epic insult bro

Yes, for the most part. But with everything in the Bible there's veiled meaning behind half of what's written in Genesis and probably more. Also the days that God spent creating the Earth are theorized to be much different from a "day" here on Earth now.

>>3930499
You can tell a lot about someone's emotional maturity by the amount of unnecessary profanity in their post.

>>3930603
Wicked funny awesome cool
>>>/b/

christian here, if you believe that taking the stone age creation myth of desert jews literally is the thing to do, don't let /lit/ tell you differently. i don't, though, and in my mind they probably didn't either.

>>3930603
epic :)

>>3930523
all creation is the direct word of god. the entirety of existence is god interacting with your soul.

>>3930634 >>3930637 >>3930641 >>3930654 >>3930665
>"This is a widely used insult and therefore not applicable. Let us all jump on the bandwagon and defend the edgy one."

>>3930477
This. Only someone who never read it would think there was something /to/ write off with 'symbolism'. Its literary consent isn't offensive or unrealistic. The symbolism is obvious in a way that calling it symbolic implies there was a literal interpretation to be made out of it.

That defense sounds like a liberal politician excusing his Christian/Muslim/Jewish constituents.

>>3930662
that's one of the things i found interesting. there's nothing really Jewish about the first parts of Genesis. They're pre-Jewish, ancient middle eastern stories obviously inherited from other people. It's great stuff and comes off like a good Greek myth more than pseudo-history.

>>3930537
Really? Has anyone ever told you that you're going to hell for something you did? The imaginary victim complex of neoatheists is laughably pathetic.

>>3930684
>neoatheists
Look, I agree that there's a lot of edgy cunts but do we have to give them a new term?
Neocaucasians, etc.

Can they not just be cunty atheists?

>>3930684
Not him, but it did actually happen to me just last week.

>trying to descry the intents of authors millenia ago.
>fuck no

>>3930698
>>trying to descry the intents of authors millenia ago.
There's no one author though. It's more like a cultural product of obviously oral stories. It's not too ambiguous.

I don't know what to say, but it's good stuff.

>>3930698
>being this lazy

>>3930698
>trying to descry the intents of anonymous message board posters
how do you know we're not all joking here, agnostic?

>>3930710

That's why authors was plural.

>>3930599
>It was always meant to be taken literally

No it really wasn't. The first chapters of Genesis were written during the Babylonian captivity. The creation story was lifted straight from Babylons own myths only tweaked in small places as a subtle "Fuck you" to the Babylonians.

Among the preist and rabbi's that studied the books there was never doubt that the creation myth was just a story. Not to be taken literally as there were so many fantastical elements that only a child could believe such.

It wasn't until the book became widespread that people began to take the stories literal. Once they removed themselves from the scholars who had studied the intended meanings and began creating their own.

Is this the euphoria general thread?

>>3930743
No. Go to >>>/r9k/ for that bullshit.

>Is Genesis meant to be taken literally?

No.

>>3930755
>>>/x/

>>3930727
sauce pls

>>3930763
>no quantum mechanics multiverse theory crap
IDK man. this bioshock shit seems pretty fake to me.

"Oh, you think the atheism is your ally, but you merely adopted the atheism. I was born in it, molded by it. The atheism betrays you, because it belongs to me!"

-Richard Dawkins.

>>3930448
this

>>3930743
I guess it is. As a Catholic the soft, mediocre belief of so many people pisses me off. Either this is the word of God or it isn't (it is). Many believers seem to believe under the assumption that if parts of the Bible don't click with secular morality then they're negligible and can be metaphorized away. Nowhere is it written that the decrees of God must be nice and acceptable for all, least of all for degenerates.

>>3930727
The Genesis story is of course metaphorical, since scientific facts make a literal reading silly; we also know that the Bible is of Divine Origin; therefore it must be metaphorical. This was known since time immemorial. Even the first humans, fearfully creeping among the chaos, would've known that a beginning so fantastical couldn't be true.

>>3930803
>The Genesis story is of course metaphorical, since scientific facts make a literal reading silly
What? Scientific 'facts' are just speculative descriptions, that attempt to contradict the true word of the bible.

Try reading this. It refutes all the garbage from modern science, and demonstrates that all events of the OT are completely possible using science against itself. How dare you call yourself a believer yet reject the word of God because some man in a labcoat with an agenda told you too. What next? You'll adopt spontaneous creation models because they demonstrate that a universe can be created without God.

>>3930803
>fearfully creeping among the chaos

>>3930837

>>3930803
>Many believers seem to believe under the assumption that if parts of the Bible don't click with secular morality then they're negligible and can be metaphorized away
>The Genesis story is of course metaphorical, since scientific facts make a literal reading silly; we also know that the Bible is of Divine Origin; therefore it must be metaphorical

What the fuck is going on in this post? How high are you to write it?

>>3930523
>progressive Catholics
There's no such thing as a 'progressive Catholic'. You're either Catholic or you aren't.

> why do people use progressive to mean cultural liberal bullshit
Progressive = progressive socialist. It means you believe in small reform towards socialism. Within religion the term should still be 'liberal Christian/Catholic'.

>>3930856
He obviously means that it's cowardly to ignore a directive on Morality because you don't like while still calling yourself a follower of that Religion. If God say "X is bad, don't do X" then X is bad and you shouldn't do it as a follower of that religion.

The story of Genesis is only a Parable, and has always been seen as various levels of metaphorical by any half sensible Christian.

>>3930803
>Nowhere is it written that the decrees of God must be nice and acceptable for all, least of all for degenerates.

It's funny that a Christian would hold something against the "degenerates" when those are exactly the kind of people that Christ loved to hang around with, and the kind of people that looked down on "degenerates" in Christ's time were exactly the kind of people that wanted him crucified (the pharisees).

>>3930932
>when those are exactly the kind of people that Christ loved to hang around with
He mostly 'hung out' with the apostles. He also saw why people fell, but that doesn't mean that he saw their behavior as equal to that of non-murdering non-adultering saint. The Pharisees themselves had become degenerate and the Christ's point was that they were sort of the worst because they were hypocrites on top of it.

>>3930837
To deny modern science would annihilate the already cracked image of the One True Church.

>>3930843
Breddy good, isn't it?

>>3930856
My point was this: science has shown conclusively that the Genesis story cannot be an accurate description of the beginning of the world; thus we are faced with two possible conclusions. Either the Biblical account of the birth and infancy of the world is complete nonsense, or it's metaphorical. Since the Bible is of God, the latter conclusion is necessarily the correct one. But this doesn't mean that, say, the order to condemn homosexuality or the concept of the everlasting fire (as revealed by Jesus) are to be ignored by justifying them as metaphors. Just because one part of the Bible can be taken as non-literal, doesn't mean that the whole of it can be condensed into one feel-good, platitudinous message; the rest still stands as the literal truth.

>>3930950
> Since the Bible is of God, the latter conclusion is necessarily the correct one.

So, wait a minute, this reasoning can't be applied to the Quran or other holy books?

Man, that's some fucked up logic right there.

i really like how the jews reduced the omnipotent all knowing being in their mythology to a jealous angry guy who wants you to be a good citizen or you get put in eternal time out

and then how jesus tried to make him seem all goody-goody with his 'god is love' schtick

so silly that there are nerds who dedicate their life to this inane bullCrap

>>3930957
dat 8th grade understanding of the bible

>>3930932
The apostles of God have been called 'slow' by some, but don't confuse slowness of mind with degeneracy. By degeneracy I mean those who refuse the Word of Christ and the Old Testament ancestry of that Word. This Word, taken as a whole, happens to include non-negotiable condemnations of homosexuality, premarital sex, etc; and Christ came to fulfill the laws, not to negate them.

Now if your conception of Jesus is that of a peacenik hippie who hung around gay bathhouses and smoke weed, then I'll leave you with that; but don't start crying when you're sizzling on Satan's personal frying pan, for His Message is clear. I'll pray for you.

>>3930967
lel when all else fails never forget to use threats of eternal torture

>>3930950
>Since the Bible is of God

Have you read the bible? Every author is named there and no one has the name god.

>>3930952
Thr opposite is true - the quran is the only holy book of the three monotheistic religions that is the literal word of god - every single verse was dictated to mohammed by an angel.

>>3930967
>but don't start crying when you're sizzling on Satan's personal frying pan, for His Message is clear. I'll pray for you.
His Message was about the resurrection of the dead and the eternal Kingdom of God.

Nothing about hells or frying pans in there. I don't know which ass you pulled that idea out of, but there was certainly nothing Holy or Spiritual about it.

>>3930957
> Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.
1 John 4:8

John was many things, but I have a good feeling he wasn't really a Jesuit.

>>3930952
The other 'holy' books of the world are heretical. Remember, thou shalt have no Gods beside me.

>>3930963
He makes interesting points, which I can't say for you.

>>3930952
The incongruities between the Yahweh of old and Jesus Christ are very troubling for many believers. The antidote against these fiery points (literally, you may end up in hell) is pure faith, which unburdens the pious of these questions and gives way to the good life.

>>3930599
You're fucking retarded, ever hear of the gnostics? People weren't taking literally fifty years after it was written.

>>3930967
>non-negotiable condemnations of homosexuality, premarital sex, etc; and Christ came to fulfill the laws, not to negate them

Like the one time where jesus stopped the stoning of the unfaithful woman?
Or his ongoing dispute with the pharisees, the guys who took the old testament very seriously?
The paragraph about him fulfilling the laws was meant that he fulfills every criteria for the messiah as stated in the old testament.
Jesus is the central figure in christianity. Everything that contradicts his message of love is wrong.

>i really like how the jews reduced the omnipotent all knowing being in their mythology to a jealous angry guy who wants you to be a good citizen or you get put in eternal time out

You got it backwards. God of the Jews was no different than other contemporary gods of theirs and those of other people around them. The 3 O God comes much later. In fact I think it comes even later than the whole Jesus thing.

>>3931002
>all religions but christianity is wrong and heretical

Top lel

>>3930967
the Word existed before the Bible was written
what entered the world in Christ was grace

>>3931002
In this case, what exactly is the difference between "faith" and "unthinking, blind belief"?

>>3931011

There is no difference.

>>3931011
For the retarded guy you're replying to? Nothing, there is no difference.

For actual Christians there is an obvious distinction between 'believing in Christ' and 'believing Christ'. Faith is the second.

>>3930599
>It was always meant to be taken literally, and it, indeed, always was taken literally until too many people started to question the utter nonsense that is spouted in it. It wasn't until very recently(at least the early 20th century) that most people in the western world probably believed it as fact, or if not that were taught it as fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism
>Church father Augustine of Hippo (354–430) wrote of the need for reason in interpreting Jewish and Christian scripture, and of much of the Book of Genesis being an extended metaphor.[13] But Augustine also implicitly accepted the literalism of the creation of Adam and Eve, and explicitly accepted the literalism of the virginity of Jesus's mother Mary.[14]

Ok then.

>>3930803

>The Genesis story is of course metaphorical, since scientific facts make a literal reading silly

There's quite a few things in Catholicism that people consider silly. Those I guess are also wrong, right?

I'm not disputing your opinion of Genesis here. I'm just saying that you don't come off well being Catholic and dismissing things for being silly.

>>3930994
'Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.' Matthew 25:41

The odd thing really is that there is no mention of Hell in the Old Testament. Now if you're just going to turn around and say that this is not meant to be taken literally ('but the Word of God is supposed to be much nicer!) then I'll be very disappointed in you.

What is it with these cafeteria believers who think that every unpleasant bit of the Bible can either be bent into a pleasant metaphor or simply neglected.

''Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." This one's for>>3930983

>>3930967
>Now if your conception of Jesus is that of a peacenik hippie who hung around gay bathhouses and smoke weed

No, I stand by what I said. Jesus hung around with degenerates. With prostitutes and lepers. He preached the Gospel not the rich, well-endowed families but to the destitute and broken up. The depressed and the wretched. It has nothing to do with being a "hippie" or any of that shit. Jesus preached the gospel first and foremost to the POOR.

Christianity is for losers, and I mean that in a good way. Christianity is for people that are "lost" (although in a Christian sense, everybody is lost until they have found Christ). Still, Christianity isn't for happy families and shit, it's for loners and for self-loathers. It's for everybody, but those who are wretched are closer to salvation than those who are happy and well-off. Christ himself said that to love him you have to despise your father, your mother and your self.

the rape in it was literal

>>3930967
>"If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing."
- 1 corinthians 13:2

i will pray for you as well friend

>>3930837
>The Dawkins Delusion
My nigga.

So many deluded fools who don't believe in a literal reading of The Bible, and place faith in science instead.

>>3931045
>Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire
There's no way you can read that and come away with it being about 'Hell'. It's very clearly about destruction, not a frying pan with pitchforks. Hell is death, God is eternal life. Read the New Testament again, please.

>bent into a pleasant metaphor or simply neglected.
You're the one bending the biblical text here.

>>3931048
>He preached the Gospel not the rich, well-endowed families but to the destitute and broken up.
No, he preached to the rich and well-endowed too. Read the source material.

>>3931048
and to add

Christ himself was a loser. He was such a fucking loser that he was born in some manger in a stable. In a worldly sense Christ accomplished very little. He performed a few miracles and then died.

Christ is only glorious in a spiritual sense. In a worldly sense he was a "loser".