They cannot be both.
Very true. But they can be neither. They can simply be propaganda. They may or may not have started out that way - we don't have the originals so we will never know - but they certainly morphed into propaganda.
Here's a Present, Ish
Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16013
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
Very true. But they can be neither. They can simply be propaganda. They may or may not have started out that way - we don't have the originals so we will never know - but they certainly morphed into propaganda.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
I disagree that Gnosticism is that large an umbrella. No matter though, I doubt that history will change as a result of our readings.Ishtar wrote:Seeker
It's easy. Either you believe the scriptures are allegoric or literal. They cannot be both. So if you believe they are allegorical, you are not a Literalist. What school of philosophy you are then labelled as being in - Neo Platonist, Neo-Pagan, Neo-Something else, then, is just a fine point. The fact is, you are not a Literalist and so you come under the same heading as those who believe in a non flesh and blood Jesus - someone who believes the stories were made up to teach a deeper truth, and we call those peoples today Gnostics - and these people eventually became anathema to the Literalists and were harried out in one form or another, as Origen was.
However, I expect you're as bored with this discussion as I am. It definitely comes under the heading of "Does it really matter?" in my book.
So you're welcome to reply, but I won't be posting any more on this.