Read other letters about this article
For those of us who read the Bible in an enlightened, allegorical, historical-critical fashion, we would only raise our eyebrows at such a degree of shameless literalism.
Everything is fair and reasoned, but I have a few comments.
(1) If you read the Bible in an "enlightened, allegorical, historical-critical fashion," I think you read it differently from the overwhelming majority of other Christians, Jews and Muslims. When people say they are religious, usually they mean a very different kind of religion than what your religion seems to be. People use quotes from the bible to condemn each other and to defend or attack each other's actions, which is the same form of shameless literalism that you seem to abhor. People use the Bible to go to war with fellow human beings. I totally respect what you are doing, but I think that you have to understand that when secular people like myself hear someone say "I believe in God" they presume that they are religious like the majority of religious people, not the liberal minority like yourself.
(2) So, then is God and religion really just an allegory for you? Is God just another name for human goodness and achievement? Because i believe in human goodness and achievement, but i just call it human goodness and achievement. Or do you actually believe in a sentient being with an independent will and that his son actually died for your actual personal sins on the cross? I can see how the parable of Jesus is one that teaches humility and being grateful for what you have, but I still don't believe in Jesus. And i guess the corrollary is, if it is just an allegory, then Marcotte's joke isn't nearly as offensive as if you actually do believe in Jesus and God.
Just curious.