What does "Bible literalism" mean? according to this definition.

[Wildswanderer]

Some expressions would have to be taken with a "grain of salt," right? Such as how Jesus described his disciples at Matthew 5:13 when he called them the salt of the earth.

Jesus used a lot of metaphors. Parables use real imagery, ( farmers, fields, etc.) To make spiritual points.

 

[Wildswanderer]

So does evolution.

Not.

 

[Kenny]

So, can you see the problem? If one part of the Bible says 7,000 people died in a particular battle, and another part says it was 70,000, you are required to accept both as being true. No doubt this will take a little mental gymnastics on your part, but I've not found many believers who couldn't manage it.

Not really

There is actually a site that explains quite a bit. such as Carm.org

The difference between a difference in number in Hebrew can be an error of just a dot. It is quite possible that the person who transcribed either forgot it or it was rubbed off over time are then recopied.

Historically you can figure out how many people died in battle. It doesn't change the fact there was a battle

No mental gymnastics, just approaching it with logic and a little elbow effort.

Hope this helps.

 

[Audie]

Seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

It is.
Evolution isnt hard to understand either.
Makes you wonder about people who blame
others for their own failings.

 

[Audie]

Thanks for sharing
I really like the "mental gymnastics" part

This is solid proof for me, that some Bible verses are not meant to be taken literal

Nope. Ifn it says someone is a door, then he has hinges.

 

[dybmh]

You had that in mind with "selfish desires"? Just curious if more Abrahamics think this

When the story is understood as allegory it's relatively common to see the serpent representing what's known as the evil inclination. (Link to google search results) Carnal selfish desires would be included, but, sexual desire on its own isn't deemed to be evil in Judaism. We are commanded to multiply and fill the earth.

 

[Luchito Prays]

So does evolution.

Sure, if a theory of science also predicts, then according to the study of humans according to evolution, how man will be 5,000 years from now?

Explain why.

 

[Luchito Prays]

As an example, the simple literal understanding of the Adam and Eve story involves a literal serpent. Looking at it allegorically, one could understand the serpent as a symbol for an person's internal selfish desires.

The story might have some literal meaning because actually it has been found fossils of ancient serpents with legs..

 

[YoursTrue]

Jesus used a lot of metaphors. Parables use real imagery, ( farmers, fields, etc.) To make spiritual points.

Yes. Similarly, so does Isaiah, using grief and suffering as fleeing away. When someone calls another a "creationist," it really does need to be explained as well. In more detail, however, than recognizable use of terms at Isaiah 35:10.

 

[YoursTrue]

The story might have some literal meaning because actually it has been found fossils of ancient serpents with legs..

I believe some rabbinical interpretations say that God removed their legs and made them slither. (So much for evolution...)

 

[YoursTrue]

Sure, if a theory of science also predicts, then according to the study of humans according to evolution, how man will be 5,000 years from now?

Explain why.

Good question...

 

[YoursTrue]

Not really

There is actually a site that explains quite a bit. such as Carm.org

The difference between a difference in number in Hebrew can be an error of just a dot. It is quite possible that the person who transcribed either forgot it or it was rubbed off over time are then recopied.

Historically you can figure out how many people died in battle. It doesn't change the fact there was a battle

No mental gymnastics, just approaching it with logic and a little elbow effort.

Hope this helps.

It helps to figure there was a battle, that's for sure.

 

[dybmh]

I'm speaking specifically of those that might believe that each "day" of creation was 24 hours long?

Wouldn't that require the sun which wasn't created until day 4?

 

[YoursTrue]

Jesus used a lot of metaphors. Parables use real imagery, ( farmers, fields, etc.) To make spiritual points.

OK, I agree, but that would negate wiki's confusing explanation, more or less, of Biblical literalism. Because while the expression wheat, tree, grief, are associated with certain common things, the interpretation of what it means may not be clearly understood without an explanation.

 

[Luchito Prays]

I don't understand it. For instance, "This means the language should be interpreted as used in everyday writing and speaking." ? What does that mean in relation to literal meaning?

You got it. Same way we talk today with several expressions, same way the biblical reading is a common language like any other one.

Of course, there is a liiiiiiiitle problem.

It happens that lots of those expressions can't be understood properly because the several events that made the generations to be out of the original traditions.

Like to say, that after a world war, the expression "piece of cake" is not longer used because people only use words for survival and the culture has changed a lot. After three thousand years, someone finds a page of a book where such phrase "it's a piece of cake" is written. The new readers will interpret it in many ways until they find more readings and compare and find out the meaning.

Sometimes are words which meaning can't be decipher at all.

However, even with these obstacles, the readings can be interpreted using other manuscripts with Semite languages.

Another problem might be the interpretation of the readings following the traditional pronunciation. This also gives you a different meaning to the texts. Just one vowel sound can change the whole sentence. I did it, and gave me interesting results. Lol.

But, as far as I can see, the writings are telling you straight a narration that can be taken as literal when you understand the meaning of the words as they were understood in that far past, not by the meaning some interpreters given them with today's understanding of those same words.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sure, if a theory of science also predicts, then according to the study of humans according to evolution, how man will be 5,000 years from now?

Explain why.

Can you try once again in English?

But no mater what in 5,000 years, if we are still here, man will be man. All of man's offspring will be man even if they grow wings and manage to fly.

You appear to have the mistaken belief that there is a "change of kind" in evolution.

 

[YoursTrue]

Wouldn't that require the sun which wasn't created until day 4?

Looking at the expression in day 1, “Let light come to be” was used. Here's what I understand: the Hebrew word there used for “light” is ohr, which means light in a general sense. But on the fourth day, the Hebrew word is maohr, referring to a luminary or source of light. (Genesis 1:14) The sense is different. On the first day (period of time with beginning and close) light was there, but the sources of that light could obviously not have been seen by someone on earth. Therefore this information had to come from a source beyond mankind. On the fourth day God made these celestial bodies occupy a new relationship toward the earth, indicating they became discernible from the surface of the earth. Perhaps this helps to place it better.

 

[YoursTrue]

When the story is understood as allegory it's relatively common to see the serpent representing what's known as the evil inclination. (Link to google search results) Carnal selfish desires would be included, but, sexual desire on its own isn't deemed to be evil in Judaism. We are commanded to multiply and fill the earth.

Yes, but that doesn't make sense as far as I am concerned. Because women have been treated as chattel for a long time. Eve was part of Adam. He loved her and was delighted when he saw her. Before they both did what God told them not to do. Then there was later the Mosaic Law. Again, a set of commands and laws telling the Israelites what to do and what not to do. The woman believed the serpent. Exactly how it spoke to her is a question, whether she discerned from the serpent's gestures and indications what it meant, or whether it spoke real words to her. But clearly God spoke to the serpent condemning it.

 

[YoursTrue]

You got it. Same way we talk today with several expressions, same way the biblical reading is a common language like any other one.

Of course, there is a liiiiiiiitle problem.

It happens that lots of those expressions can't be understood properly because the several events that made the generations to be out of the original traditions.

Like to say, that after a world war, the expression "piece of cake" is not longer used because people only use words for survival and the culture has changed a lot. After three thousand years, someone finds a page of a book where such phrase "it's a piece of cake" is written. The new readers will interpret it in many ways until they find more readings and compare and find out the meaning.

Sometimes are words which meaning can't be decipher at all.

However, even with these obstacles, the readings can be interpreted using other manuscripts with Semite languages.

Another problem might be the interpretation of the readings following the traditional pronunciation. This also gives you a different meaning to the texts. Just one vowel sound can change the whole sentence. I did it, and gave me interesting results. Lol.

But, as far as I can see, the writings are telling you straight a narration that can be taken as literal when you understand the meaning of the words as they were understood in that far past, not by the meaning some interpreters given them with today's understanding of those same words.

As the Ethiopian eunuch asked as recorded in the book of Acts, how could he understand what he was reading unless someone explained it to him.

 

[DNB]

According to one source, "Biblical literalism is the belief that the Bible, or at least large portions of it, should be read literally, not allegorically. This means the language should be interpreted as used in everyday writing and speaking."
Can someone explain what that means? I don't even understand that definition, reminds me of what evolutionists say in a way -- say something without explaining it. So what's really "Bible literalism" according to the above definition?
Biblical literalism - Religions Wiki

Biblical literalism is the approach in regarding the Bible as a historical and theological account of true events that actually took place in history, with the over-arching theme of declaring God's will. It is meant to be read as one would any non-fictional literature, literally, with the allowance of literary conventions or colloquial expression, just as every-day speech permits.
Hyperbole, metaphors, symbolism, allegories, parables, anthropomorphisms, figures of speech, idioms, etc... are all allowable interpretive approaches with the same measure as any historical or factual work would include i.e. a small minority of usage 10%+-. In other words, hyper-literalism is to be avoided in a text that is considered literal, especially where common sense dictates (eat my flesh, drink my blood - if your eye offends you, cut it out).

Some have interpreted the Bible in an entirely metaphorical or symbolic manner, or have allowed the majority of their exegesis to be based on these approaches. Biblical literalism attempts to avoid such subjective and unrestrained methodologies, while still allowing common literary devices to be accepted as part of the authorial intent, but strictly in its proper and limited measure.