Difference between revisions of "Template talk:User biblemetaphor"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
: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) | ||
Latest revision as of 18:59, July 18, 2008
Not that I am going to use this userbox, but perhaps better wording would be "historical account" rather than "history book"? And does this template just refer to Genesis, the Old Testament, or to all of The Bible? Because I don't think there's much dispute that Jesus existed... -Foxtrot 14:54, 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. --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.--Jareddr 14:59, 18 July 2008 (EDT)