[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

[B]
Now, as I understand it, the traditional Christian approach is that one either accepts the Bible as a whole, or one does not accept it at all. And this is one of the things that has always troubled me about Christanity as a faith (and all faiths which adopt a similar approach). You see, I accept that there are many great things that the Church can and does achieve, and that there are many useful messages that one can take from the teachings in the Bible, particularly the New Testament. But I do not accept the Bible as historical fact. I see it as a myth, probably based loosely in parts on historical events. And nor do I accept a God that is willing to relegate decent, law-abiding, moral people to Hell just because they don’t believe in Him or adhere to a particular way of worshipping him.

Which all boils down to one question for me, and here I will try to drag this post back vaguely back on to topic. Why cannot Christians accept that not everything in the Bible is cast-iron fact, yet still maintain their faith in God? I am aware that there are some who have, in recent times, taken a more “flexible” approach to the Bible (regarding, for example, the stories of Creation and Eden are allegorical, rather than factual, in nature) but they, I believe, are in the minority.

.

Those planets must be in alignment sinceI am largely in agreement with Spm!! Except that there is rather more external historical evidence than he supposes and I think there are many Christians who haven't thrown the baby out with the bathwater and accept a creator while taking the story of Adam and Eve as allegory. Also who realise that the books of the bible are not contemporary accounts and are open to interpretation. In such a mainstream Cof E church was I raised not particularly recently!!! and I know people who successfully reconcile their careers as scientists with sincere Christian beliefs which would be hard to do if they took the bible literally.