Do we have to take the Bible literally in order to take it seriously?

Question

Why do so many people insist on a literal approach to scripture? Do you know that as far back as the Middle Ages people understood that a Biblical passage could have several meanings? (the Jewish people have always had a more interpretive understanding of scripture)Why does it seem people in our age want to concretize everything? And Atheists, I'm not letting you off the hook either! You like to take the literal interpretation of creation, Noah's ark, etc...and then dismiss it as false. Do people understand there are many ways to study and read the Bible??? I need a drink!

First: No. I'm not contradicting myself. I'm pointing out that not all Xians take scripture literally, but in order to dismiss it, Atheists tend to take the literal approach, rather than examine the Bible from a "higher critical" perspective.

Answer 1

I do not know of any serious theologian who takes the words of the Bible literally. Plenty of fundies do so but they are pretty ignorant.

The church, not the Bible, is the pillar and base of the truth.

Jesus addressing Peter did NOT say - On this book I will build my church.

Biblical literalism is worse than a fallacy. It is idolatry. Many fundies worship a book rather than a man.

Martin Luther and John Calvin were way off base with the absurd doctrine of "sola scriptura". The church existed for 1500 years without that fallacy.

If that man Y'shua knocks on the door of some televangelists' home next week, and says "Follow me," the fundies would crucify him all over again. Their faith rests in ink and paper, not in a man. They are bibliolaters.

The authority of Christian doctrines has been maintained since the first church at Antioch, by the apostolic succession. This continuity has been preserved in the three Catholic communions - Orthodox, Roman and Anglican. The fundies, cut off from it, are adrift and anchorless, possessing only their internal subjective feelings and fantasies.

Answer 2

No one, despite what they claim, takes the Bible literally. They may emphasize the literal 24-hour days, but then deny that God was literally tired and in need of a rest after his strenuous six-day work-week. They may emphasize that God literally and directly created human beings, but they never believe we are literally made from dirt. None of them believes in the dome that supports the waters above - they always make it an 'atmosphere' or something else that they only know about (unlike the Biblical authors) because of science.

I try to take it seriously, and for me that means sometimes I have to say the Bible is wrong. The alternative is to force the Bible to be inerrant even when it does not appear to be, and in that case one's ultimate authority is the doctrine of inerrancy, to which even the Bible must conform, which really seems to defeat the purpose!

I recommend Marcus Borg's book _Reading the Bible Again for the First Time_. The subtitle is: TAKING THE BIBLE SERIOUSLY BUT NOT LITERALLY!

Answer 3

Interesting.

I think that determining what parts of scripture are literal and what parts are metaphorical would create new wars.

If the bible is just creating metaphors for the genesis of life using the story of Creation, what makes you think that the story of Jesus and Salvation isn't just a metaphor for living a good life for the betterment of society.

You can't pick and choose metaphor from literal interpretation, because there are no guidelines for it, just your gut feelings. Maybe God is a Metaphor and nothing in the bible is literal.

Right?

Its either all true and literal, or its not at all true and all a metaphor created by men who were trying to explain things with a limited capacity and no education.

Answer 4

This has been an issue within the Christian church since its beginning. This is part of the reason why there are so many different types of Christian churches. The Bible was written by people and therefore I think it is impossible that they don't have some influence on how things are written. I do believe that the Bible is God's message and that if it weren't it would be impossible for so many of the old testament prophecies to be fulfilled in the new testament. More important than getting caught up in details are more outstanding messages like the 10 commandments; God is love; Jesus saves; etc. Also, a personal relationship with God is more important than precise meanings of words. For instance, in Matthew when Jesus speaks to Peter and says "on this rock I will build my church" there is some debate as to what "this rock" refers to. It could be Peter, Christ, Peter's confession of faith, or possibly something else could be argued. But I don't necessarily believe that it makes a difference in my beliefs. Just find a group of believers or church whom you can grown in faith with, regardless of whether they think "this rock" is Peter, Christ, or Peter's confession of faith.

Answer 5

This is a good question. It is obvious that there are passages that are symbolic and passages that go deeper than the text states. I think insistance on an entire literal interpretation and insistance that every passage must be agreed upon unanimously causes alot of problems. That being said, there are passages that are meant to be taken literally such as the miracles in the New Testament. I think the Bible requires in depth study, both of itself and its history in conjuction with prayer to be understood properly.

Answer 6

Yes, there ARE different ways, but some are not correct ways.To draw the meaning out of scripture is called exegesis, to read something into scripture that is not there is called eisegesis.
Great care must be taken not to put something in that is not there.
Everyone understands there are figures of speech, but those are understood to point to a literal truth.
If a person does not read literally, they miss a great deal of truth. God means exactly what He had the writers write, and had them write exactly what He meant.
As far as the Middle ages, it was a faulty method...consider the results of such an approach!

Answer 7

If we look at biblical stories as symbolic or metaphorical, the Bible becomes so vague that it cannot be used to support any argument. On the other hand, if we take it literally, God is a psychotic mass murderer. The best way to interpret the Bible is as a myth.

Answer 8

No. To take the Bible seriously means to try to understand it in the way in which the authors meant for their books to be understood, the way in which the community to/for whom it was written understood it, and to place the writing in its original social and cultural milieu. IMO, some texts would be found to be taken literally; others not. But that kind of understanding is not necessarily available to one who reads the Bible in some particular translation and is content to understand it as s/he reads it. Bibles that are "paraphrases" are not as scholarly as translations which are written by scholars who supply footnotes. And those footnotes need to be read. Even footnotes, however, are not enough to understand the texts in a complete manner. That's why Biblical Commentaries are written -- to help a serious student who wants to understand the text more perfectly. Shakespeare is only 500 years away from us. He wrote in English and was part of a Western culture. But who among us would attempt to understand Shakespeare really well without some kind of commentary on hand. Yet, we often know of people who read the Bible -- books written thousands of years in the past and in an Eastern culture and in a culture that was more primitive. We need commentaries, and we need to make use of all the gifts we have to really know what the Bible is saying to us.

Answer 9

God's be conscious the Bible isn't beside the purpose as we communicate.it fairly is only as proper now because it replaced into while it replaced into written. the project with "Christianity" as we communicate is that maximum persons are actually not following what the Bible teaches. they are doing precisely the failings Jesus and God pronounced to not do. they are appearing like the Pharisee's(Hypocrites,pompous,self-top... fools).

Answer 10

I agree. The bible is full of symbolism and, for lack of a better word, storytelling to teach morals, get across ideas and thoughts. I believe that because of lack of formal education amongst peoples in early history, ideas had to be taught with stories and symbolism for them to understand the point that the teacher was trying to get across. Stories in the bible can be interpreted many ways, that is why it is misquoted and twisted to suit each group that claims the bible as their own.