Hillbilly, why did you cut out every part of my post that explained the answers to your questions? I put my claims first, the warrants immediately after. If you would include my entire post instead of editing out the parts that explain things, you would understand where I am coming from. The way you quoted my posts is highly deceptive and inaccurate.
Really? What do you base this statement on, personal experience? Are you drawing you conclusion based on your own inability to properly decipher the religious texts. ?
I will admit I should have sourced this bit, I apologize. I had assumed there was a general agreement on this point. "Only 16 percent of Christians polled said they read the Bible daily." and we are just talking about reading a copy of the Bible, not even comparative translations and looking at the original language.
http://home.snu.edu/~hculbert/literacy.htm
This is the false statement.
The fact that individual humans have attempted ( somewhat successfully) to deny access of the scriptures to the general population has no relationship to the intent of the writers.
You entirely dropped my main argument, which is that when the Bible was written and for the majority of its lifetime, the average person was not literate. Its not a question of denying scripture, its a question of whether the people in question could actually read. They certainly could not when the scripture was written and the authors would have known that. It is extremely egocentric to think the Bible was written specifically for your generation or for the last hundred years of the industrialized world. The only ones able to read for most of the Bibles history was the leaders and priests. And obviously literacy is a prerequisite for reading the Bible. But as I said earlier, I already pointed this out in my original post, you just chose to ignore it.
And this does not even account for the fact that among those who could read, the number who could read well enough to understand literary devices(Metaphors, Similies, Diction) and had access to original source text would be extremely small.
Try taking a breath and thinking. Carefully.
This wiggling and shifting is a result of human free will.
My Grandfather used to say " It's a poor carpenter who blames his tools."
To blame the writings for the human attempts to make them fit their own desires is very much like blaming the hammer cause you can't hit the nail.
I am not blaming the writings for human attempts to make them fit their desires, I am blaming people who try to take a highly metaphorical stance on the Bible. If the Bible is written to mean things other than what it says, then it provides allot of opening for people to shift the meaning to what they want. A literal interpretation is the only way to avoid people bringing their own viewpoints into the matter. If the word "eternal" means something different in the Bible then in almost every other instance of its use,then it causes issues with interpretation. Its no longer a good guiding our behavior if by necessity we have to bring our own opinions on the matters in question. Its no longer guiding us then. We would just be guiding it to say what we already believe.
The intent, I believe, is to allow humans to follow GOD because they WANT to, not because they HAVE to.
You have this choice as well. You don't need to put so much effort into making excuses, just make your choice and live ( and die) with it.
Fully understanding a situation in no way limits their free will. People knowingly commit wrong actions all the time. All knowledge does it better inform you of the consequences. And from my understand, informing people in the right way to live is the purpose of the Bible. If people are allowing different interpretations of words as simply as "eternal", then they aren't gaining knowledge from the Bible, they are simply affirming the beliefs they already have.
Edited by themasterdebator, : No reason given.
Edited by themasterdebator, : No reason given.