ThirstyDavid, I just read your comments on another blog regarding a literal reading of the Bible (you were commenting on the Hitchens on Hitchens review on JT's blog). Billy Bob's remarks were humorous in that they were the epitome of arrogance as he accused you and other students of the Word of smugness and arrogance and ignorance for holding to a literal reading of the Genesis account of Adam and Eve. And since when did "literal" become a "genre" of literature? (maybe it is)

I do read the Bible literally. Where there is a metaphor, I read it literally as a metaphor. The same goes for hyperbole, and similes, etc.

Yes, Johnny, that's what I mean by literal. To read a text literally means "as literature."

Did you catch what he said about an historical account not having to actually have taken place to be true? That's the typical postmodern, emergent view of Scripture. When you run into that, it's time to quit. There's no point continuing the discussion when you can't agree on what truth is.

"an historical account not having to actually have taken place to be true?"

That sounds like something Rod Serling would have said on the "Twilight Zone".

Or Benny Hinn would say about one of his prophecies. Or the Mormons would say about where Moroni is from.

Funny. Our assignment from Sunday school is:

-Do not gossip
-Do not complain
-Do not blame shift or make excuses
-Do not defend yourself
-Do not boast

All sins that come from the tongue (which, of course, come from the heart).

I've failed miserably with the assignment.

How good & true.
"For wisdom" we seek, and this is how we may obtain it.
I needed that.