From: nospam@buzz.off   
      
   On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 14:26:07 +0000, the following appeared   
   in talk.origins, posted by Ernest Major   
   <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk>:   
      
   >On 14/03/2025 16:19, Bob Casanova wrote:   
   >> On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 20:13:29 +1100, the following appeared   
   >> in talk.origins, posted by MarkE :   
   >>   
   >>    
   >>>   
   >>> The measure of literalism is in the *interpretation* of the text of   
   >>> Genesis, not the quoting of it.   
   >>>   
   >> Nope; sorry. "Literalism" literally (sorry 'bout that) means   
   >> that the text is taken exactly as read; no interpretation   
   >> allowed. If it's interpreted it's not taken literally.   
   >>>   
   >   
   >Biblical literalists claim not to interpret the Bible; they deceive   
   >themselves. Even flat-earth creationists don't adopt Babylonian cosmology.   
   >   
   Of course they don't; my comment was regarding the meaning   
   of "literal" in general, not how some might misuse it.   
   >   
   --   
      
   Bob C.   
      
   "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,   
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not   
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"   
      
   - Isaac Asimov   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)