Should the Bible be taken literally?

[IceFire]

Well should it? I personally think there are too many contradictions in it for it to be taken as literally the word of god.

 

[Runt]

Definitely not. It has SOME (not much, but some) value when it is taken metaphorically, but a literal interpretation contradicts reality itself. For example, Genesis gives a step by step account of Creation in which God divides the day from the night BEFORE he creates the sun and the stars. This, if taken literally, is pure ridiculousness.

 

[hebrew]

The answer to this question is, NO. Some scriptures you should take literally, and other scriptures are purely symbolic. The Adam and Eve story should not be taking literally; and alot of people dont know that. A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING is needed to comprehend genesis. Adam and Eve did not really see themselves naked after they ate "the fruit" from the tree, the nakedness shows that they discovered shamefullness and sin. They really didnt eat "an apple"(which is not stated in the bible), but the fruit does stands for knowledge. Adam and Eve were not the first people(broken down in the apocrypha) formed on the earth; but they were the only ones dealing with some type of laws. The trees in genesis 2:15-16 stands for men(ezekial 31:3-9). There were certain men/people who they were not suppose to associated themselves with. The book of genesis takes time to break down, but one thing I can say is THE BIBLE DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITS SELF; FOR THE LORD IS NOT THE AUTHOR OFCONFUSION 1Corinthians 14:33. ICEFIRE, YOU JUST HAVE NO TYPE OF UNDERSTANDING OF
THE SCRIPTURES BECAUSE THE LORD IS NOT DEALING WITH YOU ON THAT LEVEL AMOS 3:7; Thats why you feel the way you do.

 

[dan]

The bible is the word of God only insofar as it is translated correctly (and there is no perfect translation on the earth right now). If you take it literally in it's current state you will fall into the traps and snares of the Adversary.

 

[(Q)]

Isn't the Bible simply an account of what its authors thought about god, hence their interpretations of god.

 

[Ardhanariswar]

fundamentalists beg to differ. sigh.

 

[atheist_agnostic]

The bible should not be taken literally. The bible has not been translated perfectly as it has been translated numerous times. The metaphorical ideas in the bible are actually quite good and have some valued points. However not all ideas are necessarily good and right. For instance the bible says that if you commit incest then "your blood shall spill." Now this is not saying that you will be killed but instead its metaphorical context is that there shall be consequences for your actions. There are way too many contradictions in the bible to be taken literally but if you take it metaphorically then the amount of faults is considerably smaller.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Some scriptures you should take literally, and other scriptures are purely symbolic.

And who is it, exactly, who is in charge of distinguishing between the two? I say it's gotta be all or nothing.

 

[trishtrish10]

thank God there aren't any fundamenatlists here. the Bible is written in every form of literature available at the times: poems, proverbs, metaphors, similies, songs, analogies, parables, etc. if all these forms were to be taken literally u would go insane.

 

[Ronald]

Definitely not. It has SOME (not much, but some) value when it is taken metaphorically, but a literal interpretation contradicts reality itself. For example, Genesis gives a step by step account of Creation in which God divides the day from the night BEFORE he creates the sun and the stars. This, if taken literally, is pure ridiculousness.

Always read the complete book before giving a review.
When He renews the Heavens and Earth and dwells with us there will be no heavenly lights and no need for day and night. Rev.21

 

[trishtrish10]

God is divine and far outweighs any hopes, imaginings or ideas we may have. he is logical and illogical. for instance: outerspace is infinite, it cannot end, but logically thinking it should. because he is all knowing and powerful, he can create any entity he so desires. he gives us our good ideas and inspires us to do good. he allows us to make mistakes. do u allow others to make mistakes and still love them. he does. he is pure love.

 

[Ceridwen018]

What does that have to do with the bible and whether or not it should be taken literally?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

To what variants of what books belonging to what canon of what bible are we referring?

 

[civilcynic]

It seems that the posts here (at least up to now) agree that the Bible should not be taken literally. A view I share as well. The question, for me, is how do we use the Bible, if indeed, it must be interpreted. How do we know it has been translated with accuracy and who, exactly, can accurately interpret the Bible and then guide the faithful?

God may be divine and all-knowing but humans are fallible creatures. How can one be assured that those who preach from the Bible (regardless of their denomination) are truly providing the "Word of God". I have seen Bible quotes used to defend and/or condemn a number of different issues. We also have different Bibles floating around as well.....the most prevalent example of this is the difference between the Catholic Bible and the King James Version.

Does anyone feel that their religious leaders are reliable enough to accurately interpret the Bible without preconceived notions or bias and are accurately providing the Faithful with God's Word?

 

[dan]

Yes, I know they are acting under direct revelation and guidance from God and Jesus Christ. I know that as well as I know that God lives.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Yes, I know they are acting under direct revelation and guidance from God and Jesus Christ. I know that as well as I know that God lives.

So what you're saying is that you aren't sure whether or not they know what they're doing because there's no evidence of any kind to support the assumption that they do.

 

[dan]

I don't know how you derived unsurety from my statement. God has shown me that He is guiding them and that I can trust that when they say He wants us to do this or that, they are acting under His authority. I thought I made my conviction clear.

 

[civilcynic]

I am sure there are many of varying Faiths that believe that God is guiding them as individuals and/ or that their religious leaders are being guided by God.

The problem is that there are many differences among Faiths in the way the Bible is interpreted as well as different viewpoints from various religions on a number of issues (ie: homosexuality, abortion, birth control) facing humans today. What makes anyone believe or feel confident that their Faith is THE ONE TRUE WAY OF GOD? More importantly, still, is whether having those religious convictions give anyone the right to pressure or require others that do not hold those same beliefs into abiding by them?

 

[painted wolf]

uh, hang on... if you don't have day or night, then what do you have?
and how do you have it without 'heavenly lights"?

no book IMHO should be taken fully at face value... The more the book shouts to be the 'absolute truth' the more it should be held suspect.

wa:do

 

[Christ Michael]

I don't know how you derived unsurety from my statement. God has shown me that He is guiding them and that I can trust that when they say He wants us to do this or that, they are acting under His authority. I thought I made my conviction clear.

Our Heavenly Father must be really confused:

On the third day after Jesus' death, who first came to the tomb?
Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:1)

But . . .

Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1)

But . . .

Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome (Mark 16:1)

But . . .

Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary, the mother of James, and other women (Luke 24:10)


What happened to Judas?
Matthew 27:5 states that he threw down his silver, ran from the temple, and hanged himself.


But . . .


Acts 1:16-19 states, however, that he bought some land with his money, and that he had a fall, causing him "to burst open in the middle" so that his "bowels gushed out. And it became known to all of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Akaldama, that is, Field of Blood."



How are we saved?
"For by grace are we saved through faith...not of works" EPH 2:8-9.


But . . .

"...and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and
they were judged every man according to their works" REV 20:13.


But . . .

"Ye see then that by works a man is justified, not by faith only. For as
the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead
also" JAMES 2:26


When giving His disciples tips on how to accessorize their outfits:
When Jesus summons the twelve disciples to send them out to proclaim the kingdom of God, he lists the things the disciples should not take with them.

In Matthew 10:9-10 and Luke 9:3-5, a staff is included in the list of things not to take.

But . . .

In contradiction to Matthew and Luke, Mark 6:8 makes a specific exception - the disciples may take a staff.



Paul and his fabulous trip to Jerusalem:
Paul denies that he was involved in the persecution of Christians in Jerusalem. In fact, he claimed that it was three years after his conversion before he traveled to Jerusalem, at which point he met only Cephas and James, "and not any other apostles" (GAL 1:18-19)

But . . .

Luke, who wrote Acts, not only has Paul engaged in persecution in Judea, he has Paul going to Jerusalem immediately after his conversion, and there meeting all the apostles (ACTS 9:27).
--------

Now you know why there are so many confused people !!


Cheers