IS it important to believe in literal events of the bible? Even the Resurrection?

Question

It seems to me that the stories in the bible should not be taken literally, especially as an entire lifestyle. Isn't it more important to believe the lessons that stories in the bible taught rather than the actual events (Which many we have proved to be false)?

Of course, stupid parts from the bible like calling homosexuality an "abomination" should definitely not be taken literally (Or in our modern government).

Even the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, the most important element of the Christian religion, should not be acknowledged as an actual event. Christians focus deeply on how Christ died, when they should be paying more attention to how he lived. Although crazy for being the self-proclaimed "son of God", he was a good person.

Although much of the bible is quite ridiculous, it was written with good intentions to teach lessons. Jesus preached tolerance and accepting, but right wing Christians have no problems with gay-bashing.

And remember Christians: Love your neighbor, except the gays, Jews, Muslims, and anyone who isn't Christian.

Answer 1

I agree with you almost 100% on the topics of the Bible as I feel it is taken way out of context and the interpretation isen't granted any leave for the 21 st century; simply put, it was writen as one might interpret events of 2000 years ago.

The Bible, to be taken literally lends credence to what we deem "reality"; reality is based on our perceptions, what we see, feel hear and taste, are "real" for us; anything we Sense, dream or think about is rationalized is not real and one could be called a daydreamer; mankind is far removed from their spiritual self; few, say a Bhudist monk, actually practice meditation in order to remove the consciousness from the body. This is thought of in Western culture as bunk. Few believe in it and fewer practice it; yet, there is overwhelming evidence it is done time and again.
Many spiritualsit have shown validity of the dream state or "phychic state" as being as valid a reality as the one we experience in daily life. In other words, it need not be in this world of reality for it to be real and as valid an event as any. How many of us have had a dream about someone or something and awoke feeling great or not so great, as If it were real...
Christianity need not be an event of this reality to have occured; could any one of us tell "God" that his/her reality must be based in our relm of perceptions?; with an inkling of what power may lie beyond our perceptions, could we not imagine someone who is wired so tight, that they move from relm to relm, and could it be possible, that 2000 years ago it was interpreted as "God". We tend to name damn near everything we hear, see or taste, why not name a massive force God, or even, The Big Kahuna...with a bag of chips...

Could Christianity not have been a psychic event pushed into this relm for perceptive purposes, if not, why not? Again, with the overwhelming evidence of physchic abilities of humans, why should it be such a huge issue to think it could not occure by the hand of someone, say, Very Powerful?
Just a thought, we always tend to think we as a species are tops and everything must occure right under our noses or we won't agree it happened.

In reading responses above I can see what someone who actually thinks openly is up against, Christian Dogma; you either believe and swallow what we believe, or you're doomed; imagine, again, they have an audience with "God", how special they must feel, superior maybe?

Interesting materiel on evolution, one states it was disproven 150 years ago, by whom? This is the idiotic responses that cause thinking people to discredit religion as they take it litterally and then go steps beyond to cram it on you when they have nothing to stand on. I think the religious responses proove your point, well done...

Regardining the homosexual issue above, there is no more homosexuality today than there was 100 years ago; homosexuality is normal and the world recognizes that now, therefore, more and more homosexuals do not "hide" as those Nice Christians can't persecute them as they did 100 years ago or we shall smite them about the head and shoulders........................one thing about Christianity, such a nice , sorta nicely writen Bible with some good messages; yet, Christians, self proffessed to condemn in "Gods" name, fail to read thier own bible as "who shall be the first to cast a stone"....can they not understand a simple message to back down and leave others alone?????????????

I would prefer to think we are an ant sitting on a grain of sand at the biggest Beach around, lots of sand too, who are we to point fingers and claim reality as our own invention when we can't keep peace on our only grain of sand we possess.

Answer 2

Your problem is that you have swallowed the whole "evolution" thing and subsequently dropped the Bible as being True and God's Word. You should know that there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the theory of evolution; everything you've ever learned in your textbooks was disproven decades ago, even as much as 150 years ago. You've been unwittingly brainwashed.
Without the Creation, the Flood, the Virgin Birth, death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ, there would be no Christianity. If we came from monkeys, then there's no such thing as sin. If there's no sin, then Christ died in vain, and we of all people are most miserable.
Thank God evolution isn't true! To quote a fellow evolutionist of yours, "Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups".
Julian Huxley, when asked why scientists leapt at the theory of evolution, did not say that it was because there was vast empirical evidence for it, but rather that "a belief in a Creator interfered with our sexual mores". This quote is reflected in your response about homosexuality. The main reason why there are so many homosexuals today (compared to yesteryear) is because they believe that evolution gives them freedom from God and His Judgment. I'm afraid they're going to find out for themselves soon enough.

Answer 3

The Bible should be taken literally, especially when dealing with issues such as the Resurrection. Without Jesus overcoming death itself, He would not fulfill the prophecies made about Him and therefore He could not prove that He was who He claimed to be. Paul even writes to say that that if He hadn't raised from the dead, than all His preaching was in vain. (1) There is way more to Christianity than just some good teachings, it is a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ, who through His death and resurrection redeemed us all from our sins.

Answer 4

You have to break that up into separate questions if you want meaningful answers; it will take a long running dialogue between yourself and the world. I am way too long winded to answer all those questions at once. :) My "I don't know how it happened but I have this theory" against any other "I don't know how it happened but I have this theory"... what are the rules? Is reason, logic, or faith allowed to be considered or am I limited to excluding my mind and only using my five senses to understand anything? If so, why? That I must either tie my mental hands behind my back or be lectured about how science works I find as ridiculous as... well as having to throw out Darwinism because his explanation was incomplete or had a sentence or two in there that didn't make sense. I will not throw any other book out either if you see the point of my allegory. How literally scientifically accurate and detailed would you expect a two thousand year old book to be? What separates me from the rest of the universe is some intangible thing I call "me". This intangible thing I call me has to figure it out. What it finds meaningful. What it can take in from the outside world through its' senses. What it has generated as understanding from within. I have had enough discussions to know different people will walk away from any set of written words with very different understandings of what they mean. Many of those understandings will be technically correct and many will be just plain wrong but most will be individual truths. You are aware that all science is 'allegory' to some extent as well? That if you say you completely understand this thing in its' entirety and here are all the facts that they will come along eventually and prove those facts either completely wrong or technically incorrect. It doesn't even matter what that 'thing' is. Oh, science hates it when I say that. That their laws and numbers and facts are just rules of thumb and the more you understand the more you will have to change your original thought to remain 'true' to the 'facts'. I greatly oversimplify but it boils down to an argument of "Goddidit" against "Just because" for why for any reason behind it and we must look for that answer with our minds. How is what we can seek with the help of the other five senses.

Answer 5

If somebody told you that their mother was a virgin, that you had to obey them or suffer an eternity in hell, and that, after they died, they got up in 3 days and went to town, would you take them seriously?

If you wouldn't, then I would strongly suggest not taking the Bible literally.

Now, could a moral message be found that might appeal to some people despite this? Yes, because whether or not the moral message is a good path to follow has nothing to do with the supernatural events depicted in the book.

Answer 6

If there was no resurrection, there would be no Christianity.
Homosexuality as an obomination may not be a religious quote like many other quotes in the Bible. It could have been a traditional thing among the Jews.

Answer 7

It is all important for Christians. I don't think anyone asks or expects you to believe it. In fact you want to make fun of it. The resurrection is the sine qua non of Christianity."If Christ hath not been raised,your faith is in vain-ye are yet in your sins.Then they that are fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If we have only hoped in Christ in this life, we are of all men most pitiable." A "Christian" who disbelieves the literal resurrection is a misnomer- not a Christian at all- and his confession of faith is "just be nice".

Answer 8

The resurrection is cornerstone to the Christian faith., and I emphasize the word faith.

I believe He (literally) rose from the dead. That would be possible if He were the son of God.

Answer 9

According to Romans 10:9-10, it is impossible to be saved without believing in the Resurrection. I quote:

9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Answer 10

"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men."