Sorry to be the odd-one-out yet again, but... (Main Forum)

by CathyT , Adelaide, South Australia, Saturday, June 16, 2012, 10:27 (339 days ago) @ Helen

To be honest, I found Tacey's article quite offensive. I always thought that the important thing was that we didn't get too hung up on whether Biblical texts are literally true or not, but that we focus on the underlying meaning. Tacey, however, seems to see it as just as much a "sin" to take the Bible literally as some people say it is if we don't! I also object to the way he's so dismissive about the "uneducated". I'm not sure he's even correct in his (apparent) assumption that the original authors of the Bible were ALWAYS writing metaphorically, i.e. they themselves did not believe literally in what they wrote. I thought that people in the ancient world - especially rural people, like Jesus, his disciples and his original listeners - DID literally believe in angels, demons, the possibility of divine intervention, etc. But then, I don't have a degree in theology and I don't write books about religion and Scripture, so what would I know?

I have to rush off now as I have to catch a bus, so this post is a bit rushed. I just felt though that I had to get this off my chest. In particular, for me, the main "sin" of the Church through the ages is not literalism, but arrogance and intolerance, i.e., the assumption that there can only be ONE right form of Christianity, which is "their" form, of course. David Tacey doesn't do much to put an end to THAT "sin"!

Cathy Taggart

I splash in my poetry puddle
and try to keep God amused. - James Broughton