12
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2:
Line 2: + +
Debate:Should the first story of creation be read allegorically or literally? (view source)
Revision as of 11:05, June 23, 2008
, 11:05, June 23, 2008no edit summary
Personally, I believe allegorically. But, this IS an issue of theology so it is based almost totally on personal opinion.-- Futsunushi
Personally, I believe allegorically. But, this IS an issue of theology so it is based almost totally on personal opinion.-- Futsunushi
Well, it clearly cannot be read literally by any means whatsoever. In saying that however, I find it very difficult to interpret is metaphorically or find use in it as a parabola. We can only discard it as knowledge, and refer to it instead as folklore of our ancestors. - thereisnogod.
:I agree. If you fail to separate allegory from fact, then you have lost all meaning Biblical writers have so eloquently put within stories. I personally believe that the first creation story (as well as other things in the Bible) should not be taken literally. This particular story was meant to give some sort of explanation of the origins of the universe, and God's role in its creation; but not to hold against rather convincing and logical modern theories. --[[User:Trend|Trend]] 22:11, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:I agree. If you fail to separate allegory from fact, then you have lost all meaning Biblical writers have so eloquently put within stories. I personally believe that the first creation story (as well as other things in the Bible) should not be taken literally. This particular story was meant to give some sort of explanation of the origins of the universe, and God's role in its creation; but not to hold against rather convincing and logical modern theories. --[[User:Trend|Trend]] 22:11, 28 June 2007 (EDT)