The previous essay rightly contemns the God-inspired violence and tries to whitewash it, too!
The Deluge came from the mind of a psychopath!
Why, most of the book would have to reinterpreted ! What would then Yeshua's love of preaching about Hell mean? He is only pointing to the seriousness of sinning and that why, Hell could be just annihilation! That is trivial as why not let the bad stay dead? And what that evil book calls the bad is often the good, and if affirms faith, disparaging reason with that idiot Pauls' prattle about the wisdom of the world and the truth of his religion.
So, now, I fathom how Frs. Leo Booth and John Shelby Spong can find good metaphors for the evil passages!
I'd rather that people read such better classics as Aesop's Fables.
How would they reinterpret the contradictions within and without?
So ,they would agree with haughty John Haught that the value of that anthology lies in its message of hope, and so, that reinterpretation would affirm that hope,
I thin Erranists- non-literalists- prattle as well as inerrantists! Bot
avoid comeing to terms with the reality that that anthology carries no word of God in any form!h
They just assume that it does after noting the bad messages in order to keep their faith! Faith doth that to people!
Faith is certitude that envelopes the whole being, keeping one from further queries as it is, unlike science, is in the end not tentative, Yes, errantists do maintain tentativeness about some matters , but most cannot give up central dogmas of Christ= insanity or Moses' Folly [ no Moses!]. I suppose some Muslims would interpret that evil Qur'an likewise!
What is your interpretation of that reinterpretation?