1,352
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2:
Line 2: + +
Template talk:User biblemetaphor (view source)
Revision as of 18:59, July 18, 2008
, 18:59, July 18, 2008no edit summary
:I prefer "history book" because it is obviously a book, and I just think the way it is read is as if it were a history book. But that' merely a semantical point. And while Jesus existed, his actions (read: miracles) are open to interpretation. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 14:57, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
:I prefer "history book" because it is obviously a book, and I just think the way it is read is as if it were a history book. But that' merely a semantical point. And while Jesus existed, his actions (read: miracles) are open to interpretation. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 14:57, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
::To flesh out my "history book" comment---it seems that sometimes believers will point to it as if it were fact, as they would with a history book or a reference book. Hence the use of the phrase "history book", because I am referring to the entirety of it, as opposed to just what's contained therein. You wouldn't tell someone to look up the Revolutionary War in their "historical account" but rather in their "history book", so in my mind that's the way the phrase went.--[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 14:59, 18 July 2008 (EDT)