Christians: do you interpret the bible literally or do you take it as allegory?

Question

Follow up for MZjakes: how do you know which passages to take literally?

Answer 1

I take it as an allegory. The message is still there either way.

Answer 2

It depends on which part you are reading. There are parts within Scripture that are obviously literal and some that are obviously allegorical. There are historical and geographical information that should be taken literally. The New Testament is mainly eyewitness testimony of the life of Christ, along with the foundational doctrines of the Christian church that should be taken literally. Obviously, much of the book of Revelation is allegorical but has literal meanings. The Old Testament is not myth but the historical records of the early Isrealite nation. However, the prophets use many allegorical sayings and actions to make a literal point. The rule should be to take the Bible as literal until it is obvious that an allegory is being used.

Answer 3

The most important point is to take the Bible in the proper context. When looking at a passage, you need to look around the passage, understand the audience and the background, and gain and understanding as to the "big picture". Solid "hermeneutics", biblical interpretation, is what is required.

In many cases, a literal interpretation is appropriate. But one needs to realize that some of the expressions are more poetic and aren't to be taken literally. One example would be, given below, in Psalms, God will cover us with "feathers and wings". The image of protection is what is meant - not that God has literal feathers and wings.

I hope this helps.

Answer 4

The majority of the bible can be taken literally, but there are prophecies that use symbolizms. Such as the Harlot, the Wild Beast, the Image of the Wild Beast, the Dragon, etc. which all represent something else. The book of Daniel is full of prophecies that use allegories that have to do with the world powers thru out history down to our day. Jesus also used a lot of illustrations to make his point, which all would not be taken literal. Such as the Rich Man and Lazurus.

It's usually easy to tell what is to be taken literal and what is symbolic.

Answer 5

I think its very difficult to be too literal with a text written in many different languages translated to our language (here its English) through at least two, maybe more other languages, each of which had its own cultural background to lend particular meanings to particular phrases. Maybe the original aramaic text, not available to us, really was the literal word. Then again, Jesus was a famed storyteller. He told stories to get points across that would otherwise be difficult to grasp (i.e. parables). These are stated allegory, so I don't see why large portions of the rest of the Bible can't be allegory.

Answer 6

I would say because of the discrepancies between the Jesus depicted in the Bible verses the Jesus from sources outside the Bible, that it is mostly allegory. The Jesus story in the bible is very similar to other god-men stories before he lived. The story of Jesus in the bible was also written long after he lived and the separate stories in the bible are even contradictory. This would leave me to believe it was meant to be taken allegorically. The rest of the Bible is most likely allegory too because history was not recorded long ago the way it is recorded now. Plus, Paul refers to the old testament stories as allegory. Parables were very common long ago, riddles and such as you might call them. Even "Jesus" himself didn't speak plainly. So why would Paul feel he had to either. So I would say most of it is parable or allegory in layer upon layer (like an onion). Parable within parable, the depth of God. Many ancient truths were told as stories so help people understand, but not to be taken literally.

Answer 7

I take the bible literally. To understand the bible, however, you must understand history. You cannot look at a passage in the bible that condones killing without first understanding history. There are many things in the bible that do not apply to us today. But, they are still very true and very real and must be looked at as important, because the first half of the bible is history and also to understand biblical prophecy, you must know the past. Also, I think that you must look at what God was trying to accomplish in the OT. God's chosen people are the Jews and a lot of the things that people look at and say, God is cruel is actually God trying to take care of and preserve the Jews.

Answer 8

I believe that some of the bible is history, some is allegory, and much of it is geneology. Most of the books of the bible were written centuries after the events they describe, and in the last few thousand years there have been countless changes to the text, both in translation and purposeful omission. It really needs to be read with the understanding that while the bible is written about god, it was written by people who were neither omniscent nor omnipotent.

Answer 9

Your definition of fantasy is misguided. From a Christian attitude a fantasy is a narrative which teaches a spiritual actuality. indexed under are different definitions: "A fantasy, in its easiest definition, is a narrative with a which skill related to it different than it style of feels to have in the beginning up; and the actuality that it has this type of which skill is generally marked by using a number of its circumstances being incredible, or, contained in the undemanding use of the be conscious, unnatural." John Ruskin, in 1869, in "The Queen of the Air" "A often classic tale of ostensibly historic events that serves to unfold component to the international view of a human beings or clarify a prepare, concept, or organic phenomenon." Merriam-Webster Dictionary So, a fantasy isn't immediately fake. a good occasion is the introduction memories latest in Genesis. There are 2 distinctive tellings of ways God created the international and its inhabitants. they're each relaying a particular reason as to why God created the international. So, if i'm taking the Bible actually do I take the 1st tale or the 2d tale actually? OR! Do I take actually the message that God created us to comprehend Him, love Him, stay in team spirit with Him, one yet another, and the international around us?

Answer 10

There are some allegories in the Bible. But most of it is to be taken literally. Usually the context tells you which is which.

Answer 11

I agree with mzJakes because there are certain things that when presented to the prophets who actually penned the Words, would seem incomprehensible to the early Church era people due to limited understanding, comprehension, technology and etc. These things were written in an effort to help preserve the Word until a generation was raised to be able to more fully comprehend and interpret the symbolism.