Does anyone think that Christians take the Bible too literally?

Question

What about evolution?

Answer 1

it has been proven historically, geographically, scientifically, arceologically, and prophetically accurate, why not?

the evolutionary speculative model is so full of fallicies it takes more blind faith to believe in that than it does the Bible. for one, the Bible's acount of creation would predict the law of entropy, evolution actually claims to defy it.

Answer 2

The Bible has been translated over and over and over again. There have been mistakes in translations, and entire chapters have been changed.

I am a Christian, and I try to study the Bible from all viewpoints to get a strong basis for opinion, and it really irks me when people say stuff like this: "The world was created in 7 24-hour days, because that is what the Bible says."

Not so. The Bible was put into terms that man could understand, and the regular "day" wasn't even thought of until a MUCH later date.

All this is to say: SOME Christians take the Bible too literally, and SOME don't take it literally enough.

To answer your question about evolution: I believe in evolution. Not the slime/monkey thing, but that man has developed (gotten taller, changed physically in other ways, etc.).

Answer 3

Is there another way to take it?

What is the Canon?

The word "canon" means "standard" or "rule." It is the list of authoritative and inspired Scriptures. Different religions have different canons.
In Judaism the canon consists of the books of the old Testament only.
In Protestant Christianity, the canon is the body of scripture comprised in the Bible consisting of the 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament.
In Roman Catholicism, additional books were added in 1546. These books are known as the apocryphal books: Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), and Baruch. I need to add here that Roman Catholicism maintains that the apocrypha was always inspired along with the Eastern Orthodox, Coptic and Armenian churches. The Protestant movement has not accepted the apocrypha.
In Mormonism, four additional books have been added to the Canon: The book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.
In Christian Science an additional book has been added to the Canon. This additional book is called "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures" written by Mary Baker Eddy.
In Islam, their inspired book is called the Quran.

The Protestant Christian Canon

Old Testament New Testament

Pentateuch - 5 books
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy

Historical Books - 12 books
Joshua, Judges, Ruth, First Samuel, Second Samuel, First Kings, Second Kings, First Chronicles, Second Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther.
Poetical - 5 books
Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon

Prophetical - 17 books
Major Prophets - Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel
Minor Prophets - Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi

Historical Books - 5 books
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts
Pauline Epistles - 13 books
Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians. 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon

Non-Pauline Epistles - 9 books
Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, Revelation



Note: Some authors attribute Hebrews to Paul

Answer 4

I suppose that would depend upon your definition of a "Christian". If you define a Christian as a follower of the teachings of Jesus, as a born-again believer then why would a Christian NOT take it literally. It is the guide book true believers use, it IS what we believe.

Some parts of the Bible, in the New Testament, are delivered in clear parables and obvious symbolism. The rest should be taken literally as God intended. It is His book, after all.

I find it interesting that most of the folks I hear denigrating the Bible have not read it or they have taken a piece of it to use as a hammer against the rest.

Proverbs 4:1-7 states, "Listen, my sons, to a father's discipline, and pay attention so that you may gain understanding, for I am giving you good instruction. Don't abandon my teaching. When I was a son with my father, tender and precious to my mother, he taught me and said: "Your heart must hold on to my words. Keep my commands and live. Get wisdom, get understanding; don't forget or turn away from the words of my mouth. Don't abandon wisdom, and she will watch over you; love her, and she will guard you. Wisdom is supreme--so get wisdom. And whatever else you get, get understanding.

The Bible must be read as a complete document. One cannot take a piece of it, out of the context of the rest, and expect to have a clear understanding of its true meaning.

Answer 5

Yes... No Bible used in any study today is inerent.

I am of the Christian Faith. I know that The Word of God is contained within what we now call The Bible. BUT, it requires the leading of the Holy Spirit to find all of it and to be able to decern The Truth that is there.

The original texts were all lost well over 1500 years ago. Those originals were written by scribes at the direct leading of God and were inerent... What we have today are copies of fragments which are copies of copies of the originals. All of these were, and are today, translated by men. Men have been mucking up the words for centuries... BUT, The Salvation Message is still preserved and there is still The Word there.

Big problem is that man's ego and bias and hate and sin and all of that has crept into what is being taught from The Bible. And the fact that too many do not study The Word with a heart open to the leading of The Holy Spirit.

It is for each individual to study The Word for themselves . Not to allow themselves to be led by men.

If The Teaching of He who is The Head of The Church is studied with a heart open to The Spirit, what is The Truth will be known.

The Word is never to be imposed up on any one by anyone... God dose not do that and he will not allow His Word to be imposed on any one

Answer 6

You can't say that you believe what God says, but then only believe some of it.........only the parts you LIKE. That's like calling God a liar because you think He lied about some things but not others. That's not Christianity. By definition, a true Christian HAS to take the Bible literally. Except, as someone said, when it's obvious that something wasn't meant to be taken literally, and then you take it figuratively.

Answer 7

Yes, and there is nothing wrong with taking something to heart, as long as they take ALL of it to heart. But Christians pick and choose what they want to hear and what they want to follow. There are so many verses in the Bible that are incredibly outdated and hold no standard in today's world, yet people pick out other verses from the same Testament so they can alienate people. Christianity's really picked up a horrible reputation and it would do them and their religion a world of good if they'd stop attacking people and just sew their seeds. Isn't God supposed to be a loving god? And aren't you supposed to be made in his image? I've got no problem with Christians, but the big ones that circulate around here need to chill and be nicer.

Answer 8

Yes, as a Christian, I know we do. According to Christianity, the Bible is the source of all truth and to question that is a sin. But I think we need to tone it down a little bit. Fear can only motivate a person so well. I believe in God, and Jesus, and all that, but not because the Bible says it so. As I've said before, the Bible is only a guide to Christianity, anything else is your own prerogative.

Answer 9

Depends on which Christians. I mean you can't really group all Christians together. I agree there are some people that fall into the category that you described, but it is unfair to say that Christians in general take the Bible too literally.

Answer 10

I think all Christians take the Bible too literally.

Answer 11

I'm Christian, and it can get annoying when others take the Bible literally. You have to interprate some parts of it. Hmm, have you ever read 'Demian' by Herman Hesse. Towards the start of the book, after the author meets Demian, there's a similar arguement made. It's an interesting book; you should give it a g