http://www.kesterbrewin.com/2010/01/27/its-not-the-word-that-speaks-genesis-literally/ // __ issues. in code. __ // Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:30:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 http://www.kesterbrewin.com/2010/01/27/its-not-the-word-that-speaks-genesis-literally/comment-page-1/#comment-2400 graceshaker Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:50:15 +0000 http://www.kesterbrewin.com/?p=1141#comment-2400 im convinced that the vast majority of professing christians have not read the bible. it may be that they have read parts or even some books. proverbs in a month comes to mind. theyre sure to hear some snippets at church on sunday. but the more conversations i have the more i am confounded at the lack of biblical familiarity among gods chosen. im convinced that the vast majority of professing christians have not read the bible. it may be that they have read parts or even some books. proverbs in a month comes to mind. theyre sure to hear some snippets at church on sunday. but the more conversations i have the more i am confounded at the lack of biblical familiarity among gods chosen.

]]> http://www.kesterbrewin.com/2010/01/27/its-not-the-word-that-speaks-genesis-literally/comment-page-1/#comment-2373 Karsten R Sat, 30 Jan 2010 09:31:54 +0000 http://www.kesterbrewin.com/?p=1141#comment-2373 hmmm. strange chain of thought. In your own words you had a thought about the thinking of two guys and then extend the conclusion to be the same for many "bible-believing" christians. On which basis do you think such assumption can be made reasonable? Do you know the Indian story of the blind men and the elephant? Where they all grasp different parts of the elephant and debate about the shape of the elephant without coming to a conclusion? The same here: The elephant is the text and all the readers who read it are the blind men. But to judge about the imperfections of particular readers is to say you see the WHOLE elephant and put yourself on a superior position ("god mode"). It's nothing different to those who judge those readers who have a non-literal understanding of this text as apostates or heretics. hmmm. strange chain of thought. In your own words you had a thought about the thinking of two guys and then extend the conclusion to be the same for many “bible-believing” christians.
On which basis do you think such assumption can be made reasonable?
Do you know the Indian story of the blind men and the elephant? Where they all grasp different parts of the elephant and debate about the shape of the elephant without coming to a conclusion? The same here: The elephant is the text and all the readers who read it are the blind men. But to judge about the imperfections of particular readers is to say you see the WHOLE elephant and put yourself on a superior position (“god mode”).
It’s nothing different to those who judge those readers who have a non-literal understanding of this text as apostates or heretics.

]]>