After I read the Bible the first time I had a discussion with a preacher about a theory of mine, just based on my own observation.
Genesis and Revelations are the two books of the Bible that were not written as observed. Genesis was written by Moses after the Jewish Exodus and Revelations is prophecy.
That leaves significantly more room for interpretation and metaphor, especially when discussing a subject that is so cross-discipline as creation itself. Is Genesis expected to provide cellular and DNA explanations?
I've come to call people who harp on these two books while ignoring everything in between, "Bookenders". It applies to just about anyone who is either obsessed with end-times prophecies or the idea that Genesis itself must be 100% literally interpreted (either to prove or disprove the accuracy of the Bible).
Reading the entire text is really a great exercise in perspective though. Far too few people do it.
There is a lot of completely irrelevant tedium in the Old Testament outside of the Genesis and the handful of well known books. I've tried to read the whole thing a couple times, but I usually give up on the book of numbers and all the nattering on about hecatombs and priestly ritual.
I found schedule that break it into a daily dose of Old Testament, New Testament, psalms and proverbs. When you hit Leviticus it's hard to keep going but having that break down makes the daily routine a lot easier.
> I've come to call people who harp on these two books while ignoring everything in between, "Bookenders". It applies to just about anyone who is either obsessed with end-times prophecies or the idea that Genesis itself must be 100% literally interpreted
Wow. This term deserves to be in more widespread circulation as it describes so many cranks who identify as Christian.
Genesis and Revelations are the two books of the Bible that were not written as observed. Genesis was written by Moses after the Jewish Exodus and Revelations is prophecy.
That leaves significantly more room for interpretation and metaphor, especially when discussing a subject that is so cross-discipline as creation itself. Is Genesis expected to provide cellular and DNA explanations?
I've come to call people who harp on these two books while ignoring everything in between, "Bookenders". It applies to just about anyone who is either obsessed with end-times prophecies or the idea that Genesis itself must be 100% literally interpreted (either to prove or disprove the accuracy of the Bible).
Reading the entire text is really a great exercise in perspective though. Far too few people do it.