Riding a Donkey and a Foal

In a recent post I shared a drawing of one way that Jesus might have ridden on both a donkey and a foal as Matthew’s Gospel claims. This is another possible way it could have been done: [Read more...]

Literalism upon Literalism

This is a literalistic depiction of a literalistic understanding of Matthew 21:7, which reflects the author of that Gospel taking Zechariah 9:9 literally.   [Read more...]

Force Literalism

Via Star Roarz on Facebook [Read more...]

Ken Ham agrees with Bill Maher

While Ken Ham expressed surprise a while back that he agrees with atheist Bill Maher, it shouldn’t surprise anyone. There are a great many atheists and fundamentalists who are the mirror image of one another. They accept or reject Christianity understood as the same superficial set of implausible claims. There is no awareness of Biblical [Read More...]

Take It With A Grain Of Salt

The Salis Bible. HT Hemant Mehta. And Allan Bevere shared a cartoon illustrating the limits of literalism – and that one possible interpretation is not necessarily the right one: [Read more...]

Literalism and Absurdity

I came across this on Pinterest: This obviously reflects, for the most part, the literalistic and contextless approach of fundamentalism. But now that religious viewpoint is treated with hostility – yet without in fact questioning its underlying assumptions. Those who are willing to read into the text ideas that were not formulated until much later, [Read More...]

A Better Way to be a Biblical Literalist

If you're determined to be a Biblical literalist, or at least to pretend to be one (since no one is really one), you don't have to deny evolution. Indeed, there is a better option, that accepts that evolution occurred and says that God miraculously does evolution better than natural causes could! Since there is no [Read More...]

The Evolution of Language

In a post about five jobs a creationist cannot do, linguistics was included. Since some might be surprised, I thought I’d comment a bit more on that. Creationists deny linguistics, just as they deny evolution and astronomy and geology, because of an approach to Genesis which they think is literal. In this case, the story [Read More...]

Young-Earth Creationism vs. the Plain Meaning of the Creation Stories

Having recently addressed a number of points of incompatibility between young-earth creationism and Christianity as most Christians understand it and have understood it down the ages, I was asked if I could address the common young-earth creationist objection that  “No one simply reading what the words clearly say would EVER suppose God/Moses were describing a development [Read More...]

Jesus and Paul were not Literalists when it comes to Genesis 2-3

It is interesting how some modern readers simply assume that ancient individuals and authors shared their supposed literalism, and their focus on facts and history and science, all of which are thoroughly modern concerns. If we look at what Jesus is depicted as saying about Genesis 2 in the Synoptic Gospels, he points to the [Read More...]

Jesus the Gene Therapist?

I think that one reason some people insist that Adam in the Bible was a literal historical individual, and the genealogies in the Bible are literally factual, is that they understand sin as some sort of genetic defect. This is a terrible distortion of the Bible, not only because its ancient authors did not understand [Read More...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X