Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One thing to consider is that the Bible is not a book per se. It is a collection of 66 books. Those 66 seperate works were written by 30 or so authors over a period of 1500 or so years.
Some stuff is clearly poetry. Some is clearly metaphorical. Some parts use figures of speech.
You have two ways of telling which parts are literal and which are not. Either you study the Bible yourself and/or you read works by Bible scholars. Pretty simple. Now some argue whether the creation story is literal, but most Christians believe it is figurative. So there are a few parts that are not 100% clear
Just to be clear, I am wanting to know why each believer draws the line where they do. I am not asking so that I can know which verses I should take literally or figuratively. I know the Bible very well; I studied it as a believer for many years with what I believed at the time was the Spirit. I know what I believe and don't believe about the Bible.
I am well aware of the passages that are clearly written as parable or metaphor. But, I am interested in those believers who take verses that are written in a style that would suggest they should be taken literally, but believers for whatever reason decide to take them figuratively instead. My question to them is what are the indications that alert them as to whether to take a verse literally or not when it is not obviously written as a parable or metaphor.
Basically, what is stopping them from going all the way and seeing the whole thing as myth? That the God of the Bible is nothing more than a character in a story that was created simply to illustrate some morals or tribal wisdom. Why take parts of it as literal, historical truth, and other parts as metaphors whose only truth is in life lessons?
How much does the historicity matter? If Jesus really did not die for your sins; or if God didn't really create the earth, does it really matter? If you need somethings to be historically true, why do you need them to be historically true? And why those particular parts of the story and not others? Why can't it all be taken figuratively?
Why do you draw the line here? That is what I am trying to understand. You just got through listing some of the things you take figuratively, but then you have no problem with taking the virgin birth literally.
What is the rationale? Why is the virgin birth treated differently than the other things you treat figuratively?
I may have not clairified well enough, the virgin bith can be both figurative and literal and it does not change the message for me. Either way works, so there is no problem in figuring out which way it must be taken.
People in religion may assert otherwise, but scripture doesn't mind.
Basically, what is stopping them from going all the way and seeing the whole thing as myth? That the God of the Bible is nothing more than a character in a story that was created simply to illustrate some morals or tribal wisdom. Why take parts of it as literal, historical truth, and other parts as metaphors whose only truth is in life lessons?
How much does the historicity matter? If Jesus really did not die for your sins; or if God didn't really create the earth, does it really matter? If you need somethings to be historically true, why do you need them to be historically true? And why those particular parts of the story and not others? Why can't it all be taken figuratively?
I can see where you are going with this. It won't work. Heard that stuff a million times. You may as well ask me if I love my wife and can I prove it. I can also see the process by which you convinced yourself that the Bible is not true and God doesn't exist.
**************
And if the NT is historically correct then Jesus said stuff. What he said and what he did. The miracles, the resurrection. So yes it is important-being historically true. Of course Jesus could have been a liar or crazy, but that would not explain the miracles or the resurrection.
I think that is why atheists keep saying the Bible is bunk. It is important that the Bible be proved false. Each of the 66 books. Good luck.
The History facts in the Word of God you can always take it literal, and not open for any prophetic challenge through the spirit......The parables can be literal and metaphoric , but the spirit with Jesus is the answer to most issues ...... Prophecies in the Word are there to ask people for faith , and some prophecies can have many meaning for many calling and purposes of the Lord ...... Were some preachers may say that a prophecies means this and only this because his calling sees the revelation, but other believers may see a different meaning of the same Word of God which he can relate faith for their different callings..... The Lord goes beyond genius in His Words
Just to be clear, I am wanting to know why each believer draws the line where they do. I am not asking so that I can know which verses I should take literally or figuratively. I know the Bible very well; I studied it as a believer for many years with what I believed at the time was the Spirit. I know what I believe and don't believe about the Bible.
I am well aware of the passages that are clearly written as parable or metaphor. But, I am interested in those believers who take verses that are written in a style that would suggest they should be taken literally, but believers for whatever reason decide to take them figuratively instead. My question to them is what are the indications that alert them as to whether to take a verse literally or not when it is not obviously written as a parable or metaphor.
Basically, what is stopping them from going all the way and seeing the whole thing as myth? That the God of the Bible is nothing more than a character in a story that was created simply to illustrate some morals or tribal wisdom. Why take parts of it as literal, historical truth, and other parts as metaphors whose only truth is in life lessons?
How much does the historicity matter? If Jesus really did not die for your sins; or if God didn't really create the earth, does it really matter? If you need somethings to be historically true, why do you need them to be historically true? And why those particular parts of the story and not others? Why can't it all be taken figuratively?
For the most part the bible is something that a person can use for good or bad, they can use it to justify things, they can say it is a myth , in fact nothing stops anyone from using it however they like.
However I see why many people want an iron clad demonstration of truth concerning how the bible "should" be read simply because the vast majority of thought in religion is if you don't believe what it says you will be dooooooomed.
I do not see it that way myself, so my answer was just the way I live my life and I share it with others and God can do the rest.
And if the NT is historically correct then Jesus said stuff. What he said and what he did. The miracles, the resurrection. So yes it is important-being historically true. Of course Jesus could have been a liar or crazy, but that would not explain the miracles or the resurrection.
Each believer has a different take on this. For you, it may be important that it be taken as literally true (except for the obvious parables and metaphors). But, that is not the case for all believers.
When I was a believer, I was more in line with how I understand your position. I believed that it was important that it was historically true, and when I eventually concluded that it was not historically true, all my belief in it went with it.
But, there is another type of believer, who picks and chooses some parts to take literally true and are absolutely certain that those things are true, but can easily take other parts as not necessarily, literally true. It is actually much less likely that these believers will ever become non-believers, because one can't knock down their entire belief system with one solid blow, like you can with those that take more things literal.
For instance, back in the Middle Ages, people were very literal believers, so the Church was threatened by scientists such as Galileo, because Galileo's findings proved that a literal interpretation of some verses could not be true. In their minds that threatened the infalibility of God's Word.
Nowadays, no one bats an eye at those verses, they easily interpret them as metaphorical or have no problem with the early Biblical authors having an incorrect understanding of the solar system.
Similarly, when Darwin put forward his "Origin of Species", there was a huge outcry by the religious community, because again it threatened a literal interpretation of some verses in the bible. The "Origin of Species" did make atheists out of a number of people because once they accepted it, they knew a literal interpretation of those verses was wrong and that allowed them to give themselves permission to question all the other verses. Yet, there are other believers who think that it was unnecessary to "throw out the baby with the bathwater", that all they needed to do to maintain their faith was to take the creation verses figuratively.
I find that position weak, because one is always retreating into the area where science has not yet been able to show the beliefs are false. Why would we suspect that the parts we can't test yet are true when every claim we could test has been found to not be literally true?
Each believer has a different take on this. For you, it may be important that it be taken as literally true (except for the obvious parables and metaphors). But, that is not the case for all believers.
When I was a believer, I was more in line with how I understand your position. I believed that it was important that it was historically true, and when I eventually concluded that it was not historically true, all my belief in it went with it.
But, there is another type of believer, who picks and chooses some parts to take literally true and are absolutely certain that those things are true, but can easily take other parts as not necessarily, literally true. It is actually much less likely that these believers will ever become non-believers, because one can't knock down their entire belief system with one solid blow, like you can with those that take more things literal.
*******snip********
I find that position weak, because one is always retreating into the area where science has not yet been able to show the beliefs are false. Why would we suspect that the parts we can't test yet are true when every claim we could test has been found to not be literally true?
Once again I see how you came to lose your faith.
I think that if my being a christian was based on my intellect only, I could be talked out of it. I have heard some pretty powerful arguements over the years, but they all had one fatal flaw. A logical arguement is only as good as its premise. The fatal flaw was and is that said arguements were based on the premise that God doesn't exist.
My guess is that your faith was lost as you deconstructed the Bible in your mind. And perhaps you figured if the Bible has errors none of it was true. Including God.
The *problem* is that God keep reminding me that he is real. It is hard to convince a Spirit filled Christian that God is not real by saying there is no evidence. The evidence is there. I digress a bit. But in my mind the reality of God is the foundation of my faith. I guess because God came first for me and then came the Bible. Then came the questions, which were followed by answers.
I think that if my being a christian was based on my intellect only, I could be talked out of it. I have heard some pretty powerful arguements over the years, but they all had one fatal flaw. A logical arguement is only as good as its premise. The fatal flaw was and is that said arguements were based on the premise that God doesn't exist.
My guess is that your faith was lost as you deconstructed the Bible in your mind. And perhaps you figured if the Bible has errors none of it was true. Including God.
The *problem* is that God keep reminding me that he is real. It is hard to convince a Spirit filled Christian that God is not real by saying there is no evidence. The evidence is there. I digress a bit. But in my mind the reality of God is the foundation of my faith. I guess because God came first for me and then came the Bible. Then came the questions, which were followed by answers.
Usually the best way to interpret the Bible are several ways in congruency with each other. The proper approach would be Historical and grammatical, however, many scholars are utilizing archeological and cultural methods tho get a broader picture of the time, place, people, and their surroundings... in order to understand certain phrases and terms the writer used more often than not, especially in their apocalyptic segments. Phazelwood noted that almost every instance can be applied to one's life personally, but still apart from specifics of perso-spritual, the Bible is about a people represented by Adam....later realized in the Israelites, who were supposed to be a beacon to the world...i.e. beasts...birds..bugs...scythians...barbarians.. etc...failed to do so...got deposed as a covenant people via ethnicity (which it was never really about anyway...Ruth/Rahab..etc)...now Israel by faith, that is...everyone....those in Adam/animals/etc who are in Christ, are saved to serve the kingdom. Ministers of God, as the Israelites were once supposed to be, but couldn't get by their carnalities. Carnal wisdom had to be removed for good. So it did.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
