1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should the Bible be taken as 100% true?

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by JustWondering2, Mar 8, 2010.

  1. JustWondering2

    JustWondering2 Just the facts Ma'am

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    747
    Ratings:
    +36
    Ok guys I'm new to this site, in fact this is my first post.

    I guess you could call me an agnostic, if I undestand what the means correctly?

    One of my questions is this. If the Bible is 100% true literally then every word of it (old and new testament) should be followed to the letter, correct? If you beleive the creation story literally then shouldn't you also consider and abide by all of it and not be able to pick and choose verses or books that you agree with, correct?

    If you agree with the above statements how do you feel about theses verses from the old testament:
    Exodus 35:2, Deuteronomy 21:18-21 and 22:13-21, Leviticus 20:13

    Do you take these literally, why? Do they really make sense to you? Also if you don't take them literally why would you take any of the old testament literally?
    Alan
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. fallingblood

    fallingblood Agnostic Theist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,992
    Ratings:
    +505
    There is an easy explanation. The Old Testament is not followed literally as the New Testament supersedes it. Matthew gives the best example of this belief. Basically, Jesus becomes the new Moses and redefines the laws, making the old ones obsolete.

    The problem comes when one realizes though that the Bible is not meant to be taken literally, and never was intended as such.
     
  3. JustWondering2

    JustWondering2 Just the facts Ma'am

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    747
    Ratings:
    +36
    OK that's what I thought basically. But was just wondering how other people see things.

    So with that in mind how can the story of creation in Genisis be taken literally as fundamentalist Christians believe? If the old laws were made obsolete why include them in the Bible?
     
  4. TheKnight

    TheKnight Guardian of Life

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Messages:
    3,100
    Ratings:
    +195
    As a subscriber to the Jewish religion, I consider the Bible to be 100% true.

    When you ask about the literalness of the verses you mentioned, I'm not sure what you're asking.
     
  5. JustWondering2

    JustWondering2 Just the facts Ma'am

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    747
    Ratings:
    +36
    OK I'll spell it out for you.

    Exodus 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.
    Deuteronomy 21:18-21 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

    19Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
    20And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. 21And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
    Deuteronomy 22:13-21
    13If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,

    14And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:
    15Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:
    16And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
    17And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.
    18And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;
    19And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
    20But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: 21Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
    Leviticus 20:13
    13If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

    If this is true, then we should believe that all gays, adulteres and people that work on Sunday should be put to death! See my point?
     
  6. TheKnight

    TheKnight Guardian of Life

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Messages:
    3,100
    Ratings:
    +195
    I see your point. And I disagree with it.

    Think about it for a second. If the Torah is a work of law (and I believe that it is) that means that it is meant to be followed.

    Now, why on Earth would any legislator write in one aspect of his law that one should not murder and in another write that one should take lives? Well, a smart legislator wouldn't. So how do you possibly explain the mention, within the Torah, that certain violators be put to death?

    The answer to that is through the course of justice. As is evidence by Deuteronomy chapter 17. It spells out a method of justice and determining the administration of punishments (and specially spells out capital punishment).

    Deuteronomy 17:11 commands, "According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. " The Jewish sages of the past have interpreted this verse to mean that when a court makes a decision, that decision should be followed in future practice in regards to a certain law.

    In answer to your question, I believe that the Bible is literally true. However, I also believe that the Bible is the outline to a much greater work of law that is far more complex than the surface.

    It's a lot like the penal code in California (it's the only thing I have to compare it to). If you were to take a law in the penal code, it would spell out the punishment for the transgression of that law. It does not mean, however, that the people of California may go and arrest those who commit crimes and punish them appropriately.

    Why? Because that same body recognizes that there is a need for justice and judicial process. The Torah, in it's application, is no different.
     
  7. JustWondering2

    JustWondering2 Just the facts Ma'am

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    747
    Ratings:
    +36
    Ok, thanks for your compelling responce. I agee with what you have said, in that it is not our right to take the law into our own hands. That was not my point in posting at all! My point was if every word is the word of God and should be followed to the letter, it seem a bit extreme. If you say this part (the ones I mentioned) are extreme or not to be followed 100%, how can you say the creation story is 100% true?
     
  8. fallingblood

    fallingblood Agnostic Theist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,992
    Ratings:
    +505
    They are included in the Bible as a background. It is meant for a general history.

    As for some taking the Bible literally, it is simply from ignorance. That is what they have been taught, and other possibilities were not explored.
     
  9. Satans_Serrated_Edge

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    3,092
    Ratings:
    +1,381
    Religion:
    The temple of ham sandwich
    I think so. If believers really believed in the bible, and acted accordingly, they would all be fred phelps. Let's be glad most of them believe only bits and pieces, and just offer lip service to the rest.
     
  10. AxisMundi

    AxisMundi E Pluribus Unum!!!

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,373
    Ratings:
    +109
    So the earth is flat, the center of the universe, 6,000 years old and there is enough water to compeltely inundate the surface of the planet? (among other concerns)
     
  11. JustWondering2

    JustWondering2 Just the facts Ma'am

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    747
    Ratings:
    +36
    Don't get me wrong here folks. I have alway believed in God as a creator of everything in the universe. All I have to do is walk outside on a clear night and look up at the sky to see that. But I am also one who questions what I am told I must believe and am also a follower of science. That being said the creation story in the Bible does not in any way line up with what the geological record shows. Further I believe the Bible gives us rules/laws/ways to live by and some very good stories. However let's face it, it was written by MEN! Plus how many time has it been translated, interprided, re-written and such. How can anyone say it is 100% the word of God?
     
  12. fallingblood

    fallingblood Agnostic Theist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,992
    Ratings:
    +505
    It is easy to say that is it the 100% word of God. It simply takes ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

    The problem is, the Bible is not literal, and people are afraid to accept that. Part of the Bible is nothing more than poetry, which can not be taken literally. Other parts are the equivalent to a love letter. How can that really be taken literally? It can't. So if those parts are not to be taken literally, and is illogical to even do so, it means that one has to look more closely into the Bible, and the guiding force behind it (I am not talking about God, but the history that would fuel such a writing).

    Lets look at the books accredited to Moses (as in tradition), the first 5 books of the Bible. Moses would have had to recorded his own death, and what happened after he was dead. We know this not to be possible. Looking at the first 5 books in a logical manner than, we can see four contributing sources that are later meshed into one (explaining the two flood stories, and two creation stories for example). Each writer focused on separate ideas. Each one tried to further their own religious beliefs. Each did so in their own way. From searching this history, we can see that some of the stories were nothing more than necessary filler, as in to fill a time gap of the history (such as the first 12 chapters of Genesis).
     
  13. Vasilisa Jade

    Vasilisa Jade Formerly Saint Tigeress

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,964
    Ratings:
    +298
    Is the government 100% correct?
    Are your parents 100% correct?
    Is your employer 100% correct?
    Is anything in this existence 100% correct?
    Seriously?
    Am I really spelling this out like this?
    Resume thy literalist tail chasing.
    When you fit the square peg in the circular hole, let me know.
    lol
     
  14. TheKnight

    TheKnight Guardian of Life

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Messages:
    3,100
    Ratings:
    +195
    It seems extreme. I don't get what's so problematic about that.

    1. The Bible does not call the Earth flat
    2. The Bible does not say the Earth is the center of the universe
    3. The Bible does not give an age for the Earth
    4. The water came from rain and from beneath the ground, so yes.**

    **It should be noted that the water may not have covered the entire Earth, but may have only covered the known world.
     
  15. footprints

    footprints Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    Messages:
    2,589
    Ratings:
    +57
    Nothing in life should be taken as 100% accurate. Not a religous document, not a scientific paper, not a story on the news or in a newspaper. Anybody who takes anything on face value as being 100% accurate, is letting another person or group of people do their thinking for them.

    Do what you can, to prove what you can, to be true. Do this by your own research, your own experimentation, and draw your own conclusions. Sometimes they may align with another persons conclusions, and sometimes they may point in a completely new or different direction. The world doesn't progress by keeping the status quo, it progresses through out of the square thinking, when we move away from the status quo which we know. Right now in the world, there are thousands of biologists, of these thousands of people, only a few will make a startling discovery, the rest will only ever prove, the status quo which we know. The same of course applies to religious material.
     
  16. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    36,767
    Ratings:
    +10,107
    Religion:
    Judaism
    As a subscriber to the Jewish religion, I know better.
     
  17. ShakeZula

    ShakeZula The Master Shake

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    103
    Ratings:
    +14
    Remind me again the rules for the buying of selling of slaves, again. I always forget the differences between a Jewish slave and a slave from another nation. And if you've raped a female slave, what's the protocol for any children? Have you stoned to death your disobedient children? If you have children, of course. And if not, will you keep a pile handy if and when they are disobedient and disrespectful?

    -S-
     
  18. Man of Faith

    Man of Faith Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    3,423
    Ratings:
    +89
    The Bible is 100% true, but not 100% literal. Very few books every written are 100% literal. The Bible contains literal language, songs, parables, figurative language, and metaphoric language.
     
  19. BruceDLimber

    BruceDLimber Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    5,175
    Ratings:
    +221
    Greetings!

    The Bible is clearly not intact as there have been additions and changes made to it over the millenia!

    This is why most Christian demoninations, for example, reject the end of Mark as a spurious, later addition, either relegating it to a footnote or omitting it entirely!

    So while the Bible still contains valuable material and guidance, it must be examined and used with care.

    Peace,

    Bruce
     
  20. TheKnight

    TheKnight Guardian of Life

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Messages:
    3,100
    Ratings:
    +195
    Oh? Care to elaborate?

    I get the feeling, from the questions you've asked, that you did not read my other posts in this thread beyond that one.
     
Loading...