The question isn't the point.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger      1 comments      link this post     


Something about the question, "How much of the Bible can a person not believe and still be okay?", tells me the person asking it may be fairly far down a path that would negate any need for any belief in the Bible.

Let's try a few different "translations" of that question:

• How much can I get away with not believing in the Bible yet still get the benefits the Bible claims to offer?
• How little do I have to hold on to in order to still be in God's good graces?
• What's the least amount of faith I have to have in order to still be considered saved?
• How easy can I make it and still be on the narrow path?
• Can I just pick and choose what feels comfortable to my human reason and still be okay?
  

Now, I suppose there could be argument about what belief in the Bible means, which could quickly, in the case of say, creation, evolve (sorry for the pun) into a debate not on whether a person believed in the Biblical account but on how they interpreted it.

Regardless, I don't want to make a habit of trying to find the least amount required. Because, in the case of following Christ, the concept of requirement and doing as little as possible means you've missed the boat entirely and, unless you happen to believe that Jesus actually walked on water, missing the boat means you're pretty much stuck on dry land.

Labels: bible, christianity, creation, links

Copyright (c) Julie R. Neidlinger      5/05/2008 12:42:00 PM      (1) comments      Links to this post    

SHARE THIS POST: Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

 Like this post? Subscribe to the feed.     Click here to help support this site.