the bible literally?

Question

After reading the reasonable answer in my last question (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=20060711100532AAbqum1&r=w), it appears that there does not seem to be a real argument over the fact that DEC 25 was adopted as Jesus' birthday to coincide with a Pagan holiday to, lets say, 'ease' the transition to Christianity.

Works for me, no argument there - but.... as a logical conclusion, does this not almost force one to at least entertain the possibility that other 'things' were altered to achieve the same effect and that, hence, the practice of literal interpretation of the bible seems a bit risky?

Again, I am interested in FACTUAL DISCUSSIONS and I do not care for fire and bristone from EITHER side (yes, atheists, you too.....)

Answer 1

I dont believe so. The original texts remained the same over the years, and while a few words were mis interpreted to read more to the liking of the catholic church, the integrity remained the same. We can check this by independent scholars who have given us such things as parallel reference bibles and concordances.

I know this to be true because the laws and principals it teaches still function in daily life for those who really believe and practice them.

Answer 2

Wow! What a question! a pair preliminaries: one million. The Bible is a decision of books, a library, that has been certain at the same time lower than the covers of one e book. 2. The Bible contains many diverse styles of writings. (imagine of a newspaper: information, recipes, climate, comics.) understanding this style of writing, helps receive the meaning. evaluate you do not study the activities the way you do a recipe or you do not study the comics the way you study the front web page. an similar is genuine with regard to the Bible. 3. a number of those books were written to be taken actually; others were meant to be taken metaphorically. Why? The authors on the prompt linked at the same time activities that were similar in a unmarried comprehend and positioned them facet by skill of facet. (quite a lot like stringing pearls on a necklace.) 4. the genuine trick is understanding which books to take actually and which to take metaphorically. One clue is to ask the question: Does this incident job my memory of the different incident interior the Bible? party: As Jesus is baptized the voice of the daddy is heard and the Holy Spirit comes down interior the fashion of a dove. Does this remind us of the different water incident? you may remember to recommendations the Genesis tale even as the Spirit of God hovered over the water. ought to that is the gospel author needs us to make that connection? that is plausible. If he does favor us to make that connection, what's he preserving? He may be preserving that Jesus' Baptism indirectly shows a sparkling creation, because the Spirit of God hovered over the waters on the starting up of creation and we've got that similar Spirit soaring over Jesus. word: we've the literal tale of Jesus' Baptism, even as as we study it we see or hear echoes of alternative Biblical memories which makes us evaluate that the gospel author may be impling more suitable than what looks on the floor. Does the literal meaning invalidate the metaphorical? No! Does the metaphorical invalidate the literal? No, lower back. both techniques supplement one yet another. To get the completed meaning it really is first needed to look on the literal meaning; then it really is critical to seek for connections with different memories. What do Christians imagine about this? that is plausible to view the Bible completely from a literal attitude, even if that is not plausible to view the Bible purely from a metaphorical attitude. The metaphorical builds on the literal. What do i imagine? let people have self belief what they prefer to have self belief.

Answer 3

Your question concerns the literal interpretation of the Bible. This raises the fundamental question of whether this book is the infallible word of God or not.

Any reasonable amount of knowledge about how the Bible came to be shows beyond question that it was written, compiled, voted on and edited by men. It could be argued that the original authors were inspired by God, but nonetheless the end result that some books were included, some left out, some heavily edited so the final work is the work of man.

Further, logical reasoning about this issue would cause one to conclude that the infallible word of the infinite Creator would be completely internally consistent and totally applicable to all ages. These things the Bible are definitely NOT. It's impossible to reconcile the Old Testament "eye for an eye" with the New Testament message from Jesus of "turn the other cheek".

Finally as a personal argument, I believe completely in a perfect and loving Creator. Whoever is being described in the Old Testament is NOT a perfect and loving Creator, but rather a jealous, judgemental, angry, demanding and vengeful god. My Creator could never look at his creation, decide he made a mistake, then conclude the only way to fix his mistake is to wipe out all life from the planet in a 40 day flood (Noah) - or torment a faithful servant by murdering his family, driving him to ruin, and plaguing him with disease, just to win a bet with Satan (Job).

In my opinion the only part of the Bible worth serious study is the message brought by Jesus in the New Testament, ultimately we are all one and all one with God.

Answer 4

Somewhere along the way I remember reading an essay by Jung.
He was making an attempt to analyze the psyche of the witnesses to the literal accounts. For example: People of that time period had no understanding of the subconscious. When they would dream about a relative who had passed, they would think they had been visited by a "ghost" or an angel. The bible is full of symbolism and those symbolic references should not be taken literally. Witnessed accounts by individuals with
2000 year old minds and educations must be questioned. Imagine what a person from 2000 years ago would think of a David Copperfield show. Taking every word literally and on faith would not do ourselves or the mind that God blessed us with any justice.

Answer 5

I don't see the logical connection. I think you're putting the cart before the horse so to speak.

Much of Christian doctrine was in place prior to the church having political power. During the first century (AD) the church was persecuted heavily and pushed underground.

Only after the church gained political footing did it begin to co-op pagan holidays. These holidays were traditions that people did not wish to eliminate for the sake of Christianity. The church was faced with a dilemma, you can't have pagan holidays and people will not stop. The solution was to give these events a Christian reason. So Jesus did not actually rise on Easter (the specific date that varies each year), but we commemorate it on this day. It is similar with Christmas and other holidays.

Answer 6

Exactly. I don't have time for a long answer but many many things were changed and added to the bible in an attempt to "cancel" out older religious stories... pagan religions that ware older than Judaism or Christianity. Christianity adopted many of the stories (including the virgin birth and the resurrection!). Jesus probably exisited as a person but the majority of the bible consists of either made up parables or stories borrowed from older religions. The Christian holidays are all pagan holidays disguised as Christian.

Additionally, a recent study (by Christian THEOLOGISTS) concluded that Jesus most likely did not say 80% of what they claim he said in the bible.

There's someone that doesn't believe me? Do your research. I did; I minored in World Religions in college.

Answer 7

I have always posited that God does not come down to edit His galleries, so the Bible is subject to someone else's interpretation or questionable translation.

A lot of what the Church did was to convert the pagans.

Killing people is a lot of hard work and get rather expensive, both in actual monitary costs, plus that of lives lost.

It is far better, and easier, to co-opt and convert, so if we can alter our beliefs to keep from endless years of fruitless battles, let's do it!

Answer 8

Jesus's Birthdate is not in the Bible. So I don't really see what point you're trying to make...

Answer 9

Why doubt the bible, or Jesus' birthdate. I believe no matter how much doubt people have

Answer 10

to dukalink6000. if youre going to alter your beliefs so you won't have to stand up for them, why even have those beliefs?