Jump to content

Amy Marie's Biblical Interpretation


Poonis
 Share

Recommended Posts

In the resent topic, 'Openminded - Amy Marie Discussion', Amy marie takes the literal interpretation of the bible:

 

I appreciate you explaining where you're coming from. I have to be honest with you though. Because I take the words of the Gospel literally I find a lot of contradictions between the "I AM" sayings of Jesus found mostly in the Gospel of John and this type of mysticism.

but over a year ago in August 2005 Amy Marie criticized me for holding the very same interpretation in our debate at 'Formal Debate Poonis vs. Amanda':

 

I have said before now, the dilemma lies in your Atheist approach to a Spiritual writing. You take it literal, and anyone who takes it literal is going to find many discrepancies, as its intentions were never meant for this.

My questions for Amy Marie:

 

1. When did you switch your interpretation spiritual to literal?

2. Why did you switch to a literal interpretation while you knowingly argue that the bible was never meant to be interpreted this way?

3. Since you argue that the bible contains literal discrepancies and contradictions (constituents of errancy), do you then uniformily argue that the bible is thus literally errant as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amy Marie can no longer participate on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.