Jon Paine writes:
The reason that there is a need to continue with my suggested methodology is that, unlike your view on this (which I respect) you are the minority when we consider the population of the United States. According to the reference that follows, one of three Americans believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible.
Jon, I don't think jar needs defending, but I think you and possibly your reference, are overlooking something.
A literal interpretation of the Bible is not 'literally' what most Americans or most Christians do.
Many people believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. Very few sects read the Bible without certain factors of interpretation such as allegory or parable or poetry considered. A much larger number take the Bible entirely out of context to further a view. For example, the folks on TV who constantly proclaim that God wants us to be rich and successful.
Some people like PurpleDawn may go further than the average interpretation and weigh in such things as authorship, time period, local customs.
The only thing that jar is doing is making a responsible interpretation based on what the Bible actually says. Reading the whole story and then making a judgement is not in any way incompatible with belief in the Word of God.
It is every person's duty as a Christian to think about what the 'Word of God' means. What was God trying to say, and who was He saying it to? You can also consider how the Jewish people traditionally viewed the passage, and what significance it has for modern Christianity. The Word of God is a recorded history of God's dealings with mankind, and also of our perceptions of God's dealings. It is worth while to remember things like: there is no one Bible, Christianity flourished for 400 years without a Bible, and the OT was not even going to be included to begin with.
Taking things out of context is not a literal reading and is not useful for either believers or non-believers.
™ Version 4.2
