[net.religion] Literal Vs. Spiritual

ken@gitpyr.UUCP (Ken Hall) (10/29/85)

Comment:  The Bible, if written by God, who is spirit, is spiritual.  
Anyone who tries to understand it literally or materialistically will
wind up hating it because it makes no sense.

	  The entire Old Testament and New Testament, including all
references to creation speak of spiritual reality.

	  The Bible itself describes itself thus.  In fact, it also
points out that the only person that can understand it is a person
who has the spirit of God living within them.  Now, this is not
something I have made up, it is written very plainly.

	  So, doesn't it make sense that a book written by a spiritual
being should be interpreted and understood spiritually?  It's no wonder
that there are so many "interpretations" of the Book!  And so many
contradictions (seemingly)!

Ken Hall

friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) (11/07/85)

In article <945@gitpyr.UUCP> ken@gitpyr.UUCP (Ken Hall) writes:
>Comment:  The Bible, if written by God, who is spirit, is spiritual.  
>Anyone who tries to understand it literally or materialistically will
>wind up hating it because it makes no sense.
>
	Yes indeed. This is why I believe it is an error to use the
Bible to support some particular "scientific" theory, since to do so
is to read it *materialistically* rather than *spiritually*.
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa