Just wondered, ... i have seen a number of christians say - the bible is not meant to be taken literally

So I wondered..why??

What parts aren't meant to be taken literally?



Cheers guys

Depends who you ask ,you'll get a different answer from different sects.A Southern baptist will tell you it is to be taken literally (or so I'm led to believe .if I am wrong I apologize in advance)but others say it's not .So you pays your money and you takes your pick.If it's not ,then it is open to all kinds of interpretation

When you study the Bible (and I mean not just read it, but take the time to understand what is being said, why it's being said, and how it's being said and even use dictionaries that take you back to the root Hebrew and Greek words that were translated to English or Spanish or whatever language, and you read commentaries on the various books, and take classes from theologians) you begin to see that there are various literary styles used in the Bible. Some books or passages of books are written in ways that indicate they are meant to be poetic in nature, they may be relaying information about actual events, but not in a "history book" sense of sticking to dates , place names, people names and events, but telling what happened in a more general way, some are right out simple prayers from specific people, some are stories (most of Jesus's parables come to mind) Some are meant to relay specific information and some are written as historical accounts. Like Irish is fond of saying, in order to understand the truth of the Bible, you need the key and part of the key is kept by the Holy Spirit and anyone reading the Bible without that part of the key is going to miss a great deal of the message and will end up confused.

A friend of mine who used to be a Christian calls the holy spirit "religious fog". He remembers being an atheist before he became a Christian, and arguing about the contents of the bible with Christian friends, and he remembers the transformation that took place when he became a Christian, but he believes that the change in the way a person reads the bible, comes about because there is a desire to see new meaning rather than because there is any new meaning to uncover. He compares it to romantic love... the way a person gets all mushy when they first fall in love and see everything through rose tinted spectacles.

good answer to her question...very accurate...i have also found that the interpretations are based on life as they knew it, such as descriptions of future events...and Irish is right...without the Holy Spirit connecting us to the wisdom God gave to us, understanding will not happen...

randomhit10

Many people who believe the Bible is literally true mean that they believe in certain verses and passages and believe those passages and stories are literal and ignore the rest. This is "pick and choose literalism." The parts of the Bible you agree with you take literally, the parts you disagree with must be interpreted symbolically or metaphorically

The Jewish Bible, known to Christians as the Old Testament (not including the Apocrypha), is primarily written in Hebrew. A few passages are in a related Semitic language, Aramaic.

The apocryphal books placed by some Christians in the Old Testament are often held to have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic, but many now exist only in translation, the originals having been lost.

The New Testament is written in Greek, with the occasional bit of Aramaic.

yet there are many words that have been translated wrong or read wrong as to imply other meanings. along with mistranslations are forgeries and stories and books that were predated to seem older than they are ( the book of Daniel being the biggest one)

Most versions of the Bible are sponsored by one or more Christian denominations. Thus, translators tend to have similar belief systems. Some denominations have long standing prejudices against other religions, sexual minorities, etc. This sometimes affects the accuracy of their translation.
Translators are under economic constraints: if they translate some verses as they actually appear in the original Hebrew and Greek, then long held prejudices would be threatened and many potential readers might reject the translation. Some pastors have favorite passages that appear to condemn Wiccans, other Neo-pagans and homosexuals. If a translation appeared in which those verses no longer condemned Witches or homosexuals, it is unlikely that those clergy would buy it or recommend it to their flock.

examples -

Matthew 6:13: The Lord's Prayer traditionally ends: "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." This seems to have been absent from the original writings

Luke 3:22: This passage describes Jesus' baptism by John the Baptist. According to Justin Martyr, the original version of this verse has God speaking the words: "You are my son, today have I begotten thee." Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Augustine, and other ancient Christian authorities also quoted it this way. 1 The implication is that Jesus was first recognized by God as his son at the time of baptism. But a forger* altered the words to read: "You are my son, whom I love." The altered passage conformed more to the evolving Christian belief that Jesus was the son of God at his birth, (as described in Luke and Matthew) or before the beginning of creation (as in John), and not at his baptism.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35: This is a curious passage. It appears to prohibit all talking by women during services. But it contradicts verse 11:5, in which St. Paul states that women can actively pray and prophesy during services. It is obvious to some theologians that verses 14:33b to 36 are a later addition, added by an unknown counterfeiter* with little talent at forgery.* Bible scholar, Hans Conzelmann, comments on these three and a half verses: "Moreover, there are peculiarities of linguistic usage, and of thought. [within them]." 2 If they are removed, then Verse 33a merges well with Verse 37 in a seamless transition. Since they were a later forgery*, they do not fulfill the basic requirement to be considered inerrant: they were not in the original manuscript written by Paul. This is a very important passage, because much many denominations stand against female ordination is based on these verses.


Revelation 1:11: The phrase "Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and," (KJV) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. It is also found in the New King James Version (NKJV) and in the 21st Century King James Version (KJ21) The latter are basically re-writes of the original KJV. Modern English, is used, but the translators seem to have made little or no effort to correct errors. The Alpha Omega phrase "is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation or in Bruce Metzger's definitive 'A Textual Commentary' on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition (New York: United Bible Societies, 1994..."

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_bibl.htm

Texts in the Textus Receptus and KJV that were absent in the original Hebrew and Greek texts

http://www.bibletexts.com/kjvtexts.htm

What is the truth of the bible?

Great post LT! It is rather hard to take the bible literally when you really have no idea what the original documents said. There are so many places that editors have made changes over the millennia for church politics or evolving dogma that the original intent is obscured probably beyond recovery. Then there is the fact that a portion of the OT is directly taken from the religious script of older Semite religions.

A re-run from my blog, but it fits here nicely

One must account for the educational and intellectual level of the people that the scriptures were originally written for. There is a great fear among Christian writers as to not change the intent of the word. A fear that is instilled from the scriptures themselves.
Gal1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (PS. take note those of the Mormon faith).
It does present an oxymoron with the knowledge of today’s world. It would be much akin to you going back to those times and explaining the events of the war in Iraq for instance. How would you describe bombers, tanks, helicopters, machine guns and the like?
Or from the other perspective how would you describe tomorrow’s technological improvements to the people of today.
if I may go out on a limb for a sec, let me explain the following scripture to today’s world.
Genesis ii, 21-22

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.
Remember that I am only paraphrasing as a demonstration.
So God anesthetized Adam so as he would feel no pain. And removed some cells and genetic material from his chest. This material He then cloned the first woman from Adams own body to be his companion on earth. He gave this new creation of woman the ability to replicate the physical attributes of both her and Adam without intervention from Himself.
So in concluding I would say that we are able to take scripture literally if we apply reason and knowledge as to the technical abilities of the people receiving that information.

Irish

One must account for the educational and intellectual level of the people that the scriptures were originally written for. There is a great fear among Christian writers as to not change the intent of the word. 'A fear that is instilled from the scriptures themselves."


Or as i often remark the bible is a fear construct....

If indeed quantum physics is determined correct, and space and time are a construct So what is your point?

just an observation...... Most argue the bible isn't a fear construct .....its all made up anyways...

Sheri, you keep bringing up this personal buzz word of yours “Fear Construct” and then qualify it as a reward and punishment construct.

Our entire system is built on this construct you speak of. If you don’t work you don’t eat, reward/punishment. If you don’t educate yourself you are left in ignorance, reward/punishment. If you don’t do nothing you will have nothing, again reward/punishment.

Fear is a natural response to the unknown or to an uncertain conclusion; it is nothing to be ashamed off no matter how you construct it. So unless you are 100% positive that you 100% correct and the rest of the world are un-evolved and un-educated, Then you to are just as much apart of the fear construct of your own making.

There is as much spiritual evidence as there is scientific evidence, yet there are no true cold hard facts only speculations and theory from those who choose to lean in either direction.
It really does come down to an individuals own level of logic and comfort of thought. The more we know the less we understand both scientifically and spiritually.

Irish

Irish...thanks for sharing from your blog. I can see where you are coming from; however, that story...in and of itself just couldn't be taken at face value IMHO. So it reads...God created Adam in his (our) own image. Question...Was Adam actually a male then, created with the standard male genitals for reproduction? Why would he need such equipment for reproduction if he was alone. What use are male reproductive organs without the complimentary female ones? So now an all knowing God becomes aware that Adam is lonely and decides he needs companionship. Apparently, God's presence was not sufficient. So God creates Eve, only this time...instead of doing it from the dust...he puts Adam to sleep, and performs surgery. Did God give Adam reproductive organs then? If he was created with them in the first place...why wouldn't God have created Eve at the same time? So the story goes...God created Eve so that Adam would not be lonely. Why did he give (male) Adam testes at the start unless he already knew that he would have to create Eve also? Why not just create the two of them at the same time? Perhaps when God made Eve, he did a little extra surgery on Adam whilst he slept, and furnished him with the appropriate equipment....dunno. Imagine his surprise when he woke up! I mean no disrespect to your point of view...but am I missing something here?

Good questions Innerspace I believe that His image that we are created in is not a physical image but in His creative abilities, reflected in our art and music. In the choice to create or destroy to love or to hate.
As for the genitalia I am not sure, it’s like the age old question did Adam an Eve have a belly button?
I think that Adam was equipped from creation and God had waited for him to desire a partner, friend and lover as the other animals of creation had, a gift has far more value when it is desired.

Irish

The Jews view part of the Ot as history. The abide by a modified version of the Mosaic law today. i.e. pretty much everything minus the capital punishment stuff. The christians for the most part see the "church epistles" as being "doctrine for the church today and not the OT doctrine that reportedly ended with Christ fullfilling the law. So, it really depends on who you ask this question to. But it does seem that both the Jews and Christians by and large do take the bible literally.

How about the apple and the tree of good and evil story. So, God creates Adam and Eve, with no knowledge of good or evil, right or wrong...they are truly innocent. He places them in a Garden, and for some reason creates a tree whose fruit gives you the Knowledge of Good and Evil. This is a God who cannot look upon evil himself, yet creates a tree as such. Then this all knowing, loving God tells these innocent beings "DO NOT EAT OF THIS TREE, OR YOU'LL DIE". Adam and Eve hear this and somehow seem to understand? There had never been death before. God now leaves these two innocent "children of God" alone to fend for themselves, keeping in mind...Adam and Eve have no idea what right and wrong means. The only way they can gain this knowledge is by.... eating from the Tree that God so lovingly put there. Imagine placing poison in your children's' bedroom, telling them not to put it in their mouths, and then being surprised when they poison themselves with it.

lol I too wondered a lot, how on earth did Adam and Eve understand God...........it cracks me up...and how on earth did they manage to live for over 900 years, when the avarage human lived to an avarage age of 26/7 back then...(early man)...I go on to think..they had two sons...one took himself a wife.................where did he take a wife from??? yellow eden pages?? lol where??

lots of question lol

Something else that puzzles me which involves their nakedness. Apparently, when they ate the fruit they suddenly realized that they were naked, and this was shameful. Weren't all other creatures in the Garden also naked? If it was inherently wrong and immoral for these two to walk around naked, then why did God create them that way in the first place? So they became shameful of their nakedness because their loving Father placed temptation right in front of their noses...having the foreknowledge that they would partake. I, as a parent...can't even imagine doing such things to my child.

my kid was born naked too......I was sooooooooo scundered, I burried my head in shame...wondered, what the doctors must have thought, the SHAME of it all

If my sprog had her own way, she's run around naked...she whips off the nappy (diaper) and does it at night...it gets annoying lol

There is a vast difference between the knowledge of good and evil and that of right and wrong. You do not have to explain the fundamentals of electricity to a two year old in order for them to obey your demand that they not stick their tongue in the light socket. It is there for a reason, even if they can not comprehend what it for, they still need to respect your demand that they do not touch it or else. Listening or not listing to your demand is within right and wrong.

Irish

Their nakedness had little to do with covering their bodies as it had to do with the realization that God was able to see what they had done, that they were completely exposed in their wrong doings and attempted to hide the facts by covering themselves physically.

Irish

Why shouldn't it be taken literally?

From the first days of christ and the bible for years all this was taken very and seriously literal. As time goes by it seems like christians just keep picking and choosing the more we learn about the world and what's in it. It's sad really... They're just fighting to survive so while all the past christians believed so dearly in their holy book, the modern christian doesn't. From the flat earth, to evolution, noah's ark and more.

How do you expect a toddler to understand you, if you dont TEACH that toddler to understand a single word??

Adam and eve wernt toddlers, but God didnt teach them anything, all he did was tell them what to do and what not to do.............dont add up

Until they grow and reach the ability to understand electricity they still need to understand "Do Not Touch This" and as a mother who does not want to teach electricity mechanics to a Two year old you say simply "because I said SOo" I'm sure you have already experience this phenomena Geri

Irish

agreed many of the systems that are in existance are built on this idea....there are no absolutes irish....

there are only two natural fears all others are taught...our systems are built on false understandings to begin with....

I agree there is much we don't know.....that includes me LOL......

Did God teach adam and eve how to understand what he was saying??

Remember, the story of Adam and Eve also says that Adam named all the animals, so not only did God teach Him to understand Him, but Adam was quite a bright guy.

He must have been a good speller too

... for a start all creatures were made male and female for the purpose of reproducing and filling the earth so they were all created with reproductive organs! including adam!!! even plants, trees, and their fruits and what not were created to bear seeds... for reproduction...

from gen 2:19 onwards

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs [h] and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib [i] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

i.e. nothing already created was suitable for him... so eve was made especially to be his own kind and a help mate etc... hence also the reason animals went in by 2's of their kind into the ark, as male/female... i'm sure god had it figured out

God tells adam & eve that there is now one thing that they cannot do. He specifically tells them that they can eat of every single tree that is in this garden -with the exception of one tree. This one tree was called the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil."

Think about this. God makes this test that they both had to pass for the future implication of all mankind as easy as He possibly could. He tells them that all they have to do is stay off of this one tree. He tells them that they can literally eat from every other tree that is in this garden.

The Bible does not tell us how many other trees were in this garden - but I bet there were thousands of them. All they had to do was to obey Gods direct command to stay off of this one tree - and they would have eventually passed the test.

But when you put things like, we were given free will an ability to think for ourselves, curiosity Etc. into this context none of it really makes sense!

God laying down this command upon adam and eve, and in knowing they would wonder what that tree was all about it just seems that god was just bored that day and decided to toy with his children! It just doesn't make sense.


Dragon,

... there was another character in the form of the serpant who convinced eve she will become like god and know good and evil if she ate the fruit and that she wouldn't die... main reason why they did it...

What language did he name them in?

The language God taught him, I would assume.

maybe the thing about adam and eve did happen. probably not in so much of a literal sense. technically, what happened in the story did happen, just not in quiet so much of a nutshell. its probably more metaphoric than anything, but the general principle is true. i wonder if science is the tree of knowledge, and the more that we learn, we begin to unravel gods amazing work, and to some people it makes it less remarkable. not to me. the more i see the complexity of life, the more amazing it becomes to me.

How do we know god taught him...anything??

Are we to just assume God did?? cuz it doesnt state he taught Adam or eve anything...

If you believe the Bible ( I do not ) then this was a test we were bound to fail. And the thing is that this god knew we were going to fail before even planting the damn tree. If he is all knowing & all powerful that is. Really its a bit cruel and twisted. "I know you're going to screw up. I knew you were going to screw up before I made you. Even though I knew this I still planted the tree, sat back and waited until you failed. Then I smacked you around and cursed you and your ilk for the rest of eternity" Exactly what kind of god is this? We were screwed from the start. This god made the rats, loaded the trap, placed the cheese and then got all kinds of ticked off when the rat went for it. This is seriously messed up. You would call me cruel if I raised a dog from a puppy, treated it with love and kindness, gave it everything it would ever need, made sure it was house trained and then banished it from my home if he screwed up and had an accident. Its more like I left the doggy door open and some great evil came by and nailed it shut. Is it really the dogs fault? Not only did I kick the dog out of my home but I would make sure it and his kin would be tortured forever. A bit cruel don't you think? Exactly how does this make sense.

If you take this literally then we were bound to fail. Eve might not have taken the fruit but what about their kids? Their grandchildren? Does it mention anywhere that there was a time limit on this test? After 1000 years the tree would go away and we would live forever in his garden? Was the test just for Adam and Eve or anyone in the garden? If the snake was allowed in don't you think it would have been able to influence a child? Eves great great grandkid is wandering the garden, talks with the snake, eats the apple and screws over humanity. We were bound to fail. There was no other option. Somehow. Someway. Sometime. We were going to fail his little test.

Is the Bible meant to be take literally? That depends on your view. I find myself agreeing with the following idea. If you believe the Bible is the word of God and this God is perfect then you can not go picking and choosing what verses, rules or stories you want to believe in and which one you do not.

Do I believe the Bible? No I do not. I believe both Sheri and Irish are correct in certain ways. Its a book of fear meant to keep you in line or else. Its a book meant to keep you in line despite your pagan neighbor going out and having fun while you sit at home praying like the good Christian you are because he is going to burn in hell once he dies while good little Christians go to heaven for eternity. Like most of the Holidays, rules and ideas that Christianity has it is meant to draw people to it based on a sugar coated exterior but once you're in they keep you there with fear. Man created religion as an answer to the unknown. We fear the unknown and thus are drawn to something that has a pretty good go at explaining it all. Even if it talks in circles. Man then used fear to keep religions alive because lets face it, religion is a good business. We might find the unknown scary but roasting in a firey hell for all of eternity if we are wrong is scarier. What puts more fear into you? Looking up into the night sky wondering why we are here and all those other tough questions or looking up into the night sky(having been given all the answers), realize he is watching and unless you want to burn in hell you had better get inside and say your prayers?

Personally I will look into the night sky wondering and questioning all those tough little questions. Will I ever find answers? Perhaps not but I will be comforted knowing that I am leading a good life, I do what I can for others, I care for my family and that I am able to make decisions and live a life free of the confinements of another mans religion. If there is this God and if I will truly be judged when I die and I'm put on the fast train to hell, not for living a bad life I had lived quite a good one but for breaking some obscure rule buried in some holy book somewhere then so be it. I wont live a life in fear of the great boogeyman in the sky.

Kevin

you are very quick to say that mankind has failed.

If you believe the Bible we did fail. God put the tree there as a test and punished us accordingly after we ate the apple. I would think that the failure of this (regardless of the snakes part) is rather obvious.

Classroom = Eden
Teacher = God
Students = Adam & Eve
Test = Tree

Rules are as follows:
Pass = Dont eat the apple
Failure = Eating the apple

We ate the apple and we failed. Correct?

Or am I missing something here? Is us failing part of his plan, he knew we would fail and had things planned all along?

Kevin

yes, we usually do succumb to temptation, but we dont have to.. we have a choice. god gave us a choice. without free will, we are robots.

Yea you are missing something mate....you said God = teacher

show me where it states in the bible - God TAUGHT them anything???

and dont go showing me what God told them not to do ect..i already know this...just see if you can show me where it reads, that God TAUGHT them anything..ie - how to understand what he meant ect

god gave us a moral sense of what is right or wrong. there are anomalities of morality, but for the most part people know what they should do. its usually easier to do the opposite though. he left the responsibility of teaching and learning to parent/son/daughter relationships. thats the biggest failure of mankind, a lack of proper parental abilities. if we fail our children, we fail mankind

That doesnt tell me anything how God taught them, how to UNDERSTAND him when he speaks to them,,,,

Children are TAUGHT how to understand arent they?? I'd like to think so lol

SO God should have taught them BOTH, how to understand him..and all what he says.................but see, the bible doesnt tell you this...all it tells you is what God told them not to do....dont add up

the man that wrote the story, didn't have his thinking cap on at the time lol...he didnt explain too much either

exactly, people wrote the bible. god didnt fax it from heaven. what our parents teach us isnt all that we are. my dad was an ass to me, but im not an ass to my children. does that not exhibit an internal sense of right or wrong? we are not always the robots that our parents teach us to be. we all have a choice. that is the beauty of life.

Yes but if GOD personally took you aside and taught you things..ie - how to understand him................then if God gives you a test...to make a choice...then YES you will fully understand him..............but if he doesnt teach you diddly...and gives you a test..you will fail BIG time, all because you didn't understand what was going on...stands to reason


God told Adam and eve it was arong to eat of the tree.............now think about it..............they are in a garden, hungry...and there is a tree with fruit on it......and told not to eat from it..........they arent going to know, what the tree is for a start...cuz it dosnt say, they where even taught what a tree is LMAO never mind, what Gods command meant

Example..........If I dont want Becky to eat the speacial cake I made for my partners birthday..............well in order to get her to do what i say...........I would have had to have taught her...how to speak..learn things...understand me and then leads to knowing what I mean...bit by bit...so when the time comes...when I point at the cake and say - Becky do not touch this cake, wait till daddy gets home, she is going to UNDERSTAND me...all because I taught her HOW

Easy there love. I was using the whole classroom, teacher, student, test thing to show that mankind had failed in response to KingKarma. I used teacher as meaning the test giver and not someone who teaches. Im sorry this led to a misunderstanding.

I will agree with your views. All they knew was right and probably had no idea what wrong was. They walked around in paradise, had a loving mate, all the comforts in the world, no fear of anything really and then God tells them dont do this or else. If there is one simple fact we can all agree with it is that children often do not listen the first time around. We tell them dont put your hand on the hot stove yet they still get burned. They learn a lesson. Oh so thats why they told me not to do that. But when a child is given everything and has no concept of "dont do that or else" how can they be expected to listen?

Children need chances to live and learn why they should not do something they are told not to do. This God gave us one chance and (seemingly) expected us to pass yet we failed. Surprise surprise.

Kevin

BM, the Bible also doesn't say that Adam and Eve ate, but I'm sure they did, it doesn't mention where they sept, but I'm sure they did, so simply because it doesn't go into the detail about what God taught Adam and Eve it does not mean that He didn't. Obviously, Adam and Eve knew how to speak so He , obviously taught them.

first off, adam and eve werent starving. the tree of knowledge wasnt the only tree in the garden. are you saying that people arent born with a morality? some people are not strong enough to resist the things that they have been taught from children, but they have a choice to not commit acts of evil. it is true that god made temptation, well, very tempting, but he never made anyone do anything. is ther not two sides of a coin? besides, i wouldnt compare eating cake to moral decisions of right and wrong

LOL when you said - easy there love <--could have sworn you where from ireland LOL thats what we say over here lol call everyone love or sweetheart lol

As for my views...........I don't believe in bible stories period.............the adam and eve story doesnt add up...its one of the far fetched stories I have ever read...I could go on but meh...I am tired lol

BUT I do respect those that do follow the bible, fair play to them...