Biblical literalists?

Question

I understand that there are a lot of people out there who think that the Bible is the true, literal word of God. I see where the word of God bit is coming from, but I don't understand why it has to be literally true. It seems that in the New Testament, Jesus tells a lot of stories to get his point across, but that no one thinks that there had to be a real good Samaritan or a mustard seed. Why, then, must there have been a six day Creation or a catastrophic flood? Why couldn't those also be stories that are more important for their lessons than their veracity? I don't mean to offend at all; I would just like to understand your point of view. Why do you personally believe that it has to be true?

I'm not actually trying to make a point with this, at least this time. I really do want to know _why_. Where does it say that it's 100% true, and why do some preachers teach it as such? I'm really, honestly, trying to understand what the difference is between the parables and the Creation story, for instance.

Oh, and I'm not a literalist myself, so you guys don't have to explain that the Bible isn't literally true to me. I just want to try to understand the opposing view point.

Answer 1

Well, as far as the creation story goes, the main concern is of Christians is to preserve believe in the literal death and resurrection of Jesus, and His substitutionary atonement.

The Bible goes to great lengths to describe Jesus as the "second Adam" through whom we inherit life, though we inherited death from the first Adam. Many Christians feel that this concept only holds water if the first Adam was as much an actual, literal person as Jesus the second Adam is. And many Christians feel that the first Adam can only be a literal person if the creation account is also literal.

This is not, however, a universal opinion in Christianity. There are other views of the creation account which respect the complete truth of the creation account without applying a literal interpretation. Progressive creationism in particular allows for the existence of a literal first Adam.

Answer 2

Was all physical creation accomplished in just six days sometime within the past 6,000 to 10,000 years?

The facts disagree with such a conclusion: (1) Light from the Andromeda nebula can be seen on a clear night in the northern hemisphere. It takes about 2,000,000 years for that light to reach the earth, indicating that the universe must be at least millions of years old. (2) End products of radioactive decay in rocks in the earth testify that some rock formations have been undisturbed for billions of years.

Genesis 1:3-31 is NOT discussing the original creation of matter or of the heavenly bodies. It describes the preparation of the already existing earth for human habitation. This included creation of the basic kinds of vegetation, marine life, flying creatures, land animals, and the first human pair. All of this is said to have been done within a period of six “days.” However, the Hebrew word translated “day” has a variety of meanings, including ‘a long time; the time covering an extraordinary event.’ (Old Testament Word Studies, Grand Rapids, Mich.; 1978, W. Wilson, p. 109) The term used allows for the thought that each “day” could have been thousands of years in length.

We know this also in part because God entered into his day of rest, and it has not yet stopped. You will notice a beginning and an end to each of the creative days, but there is not end for the day of Jehovah's rest, that's due to his still resting.

The Deluge is also an event. It was/is not a parable. The fact that Christ and others pointed to the flood of Noah's day as a historical event to drive the point home of the impending end of the Jewish System of things then and on a broader scale of fullfillment in our days.

Answer 3

The Bible, in the greater 'scheme' of things, tells about the creation of man. It is a LIVING plan, still being lived out TODAY. When you have the spirit to understand(which requires humbling yourself before Yahshua and God), then you realize the plan that the Bible lays out as far as ETERNAL LIFE. Hence the thought 'He knew the END from the BEGINNING'
The parables Yahshua told were, in part, to combine certain thoughts in the way God had, is, or is going to move within mankind. For example, if you take the Matthew 22 marriage parable, you will find that parable takes what Hezekiah did in his first year of reign(2Chronicles 29-30), along with the idea of Jacob's marriage to Leah and Rachel(a 2 week marriage feast). There is a multiplicity to it, which then leads to a deeper understanding of things. Thus, this describes something that will take place in the near future, and how it will come about.
You first must come to the child-like faith to start to understand all this.
BTW, there are many cultures that have a 'flood' story. It is not just scripture based.

Answer 4

as an outsider looking in I see your confusion. The Bible is a copulation of several writing styles from poetry, apocalyptic literature, to factual eyewitness accounts. In every way the Bible is authentic and accurate. Such historical accounts are not only found in the Bible, but also from historians from Rome, Egypt, Greece and other records. The flood account is recognised in many cultures from here to China and back.
While Jesus did use many parables to convey His point, things like the mustard seed can be purchaced and grown in the right environment.

I am not here to cause harm but if it were not true, it would not have lasted over seven thousand years passing through Egypt, Rome and even Hitler's Germany. It is the fact that the Bible is true that irritates atheists and agnostics alike because they can't win over true believers.

I hope the personal testamony enlightens if not wins over.

Answer 5

well the real problem is that when youquestion one aspect of the Bible, then you start questioning many aspects. Before you know it, then you are questioning ALL of it.

The Bible itself claims to be the word of God. And God is not a man that He EVER has to lie about anything at all.

So I believe every word of it. And i don;t pick and choose which parts might be true and which may not be. The Bible is NOT a buffet. It's a single course meal. Take all of it or none of it

God be with you!

Jesus was CARRIED into the tomb but He WALKED OUT!

Answer 6

Awesome Question.
I can only speak for myself. I take everything literally at first. There is a good reason for that. Even the parables become more vivid when you take the story literally then look for the layers of teaching. The Bible is a very magical book. I find myself using the story of Job and David and Noah and Jonah to teach me things about my life and those around me every day. They can be used for hundreds of situations and decisions we make every day. We have to take them literally to know the base story.

Answer 7

Rightly dividing the Word of truth is to know when God is stating a fact, a prophetic picture, a type, a foreshadow or a literal situation. The Bible never said, "God spoke a parable regarding His creation." However, all the parables started with... And Jesus spoke this parable. To assign figures to that which are not figures is how cults start.

Robert Anderson who was the inspector for Scotland Yard (who almost caught Jack the Ripper) took the book of Daniel as providing the date Messiah was to come. He did not allegorize any of it--he took it as a literal proclamation. His incredible calculations pinpointed the DAY Jesus rode in to Jerusalem. For this he was knighted by Queen Victoria and became Sir Robert Anderson.
However, he read other prophesies regarding Israel becoming a nation again and thought that this was WAY too preposterous. No nation, after being conquered and scattered, EVER returned again to form a nation and a people. So it must have had some "allegorical" meaning to it. Well, in 1948, Sir Robert Anderson was proven wrong. Sir Robert Anderson believed the Bible, but his doubt in a wild claim such as Israel becoming a nation was too much for him. THAT is how accurate prophecy is. Before the fulfillment took place, Anderson assumed it was wrong (having lived in the Victorian era pre 1948). He twisted nothing, but assumed it was something else entirely.

How is it that a book can be 100% accurate in foresight, but inaccurate in hindsight? THAT is what does not make sense.

2 Peter 1:16-21 (condensed)
For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty...and so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place...for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved

"The Coming Prince" by Sir Robert Anderson
http://www.amazon.com/Coming-Prince-Robert-Anderson-Library/dp/0825421152

Answer 8

You misunderstand literalism, or at least some forms of literalism. If I read where it is poetry I read poetry. If it says that this is history then I take it as history. If it is a parable or a story or if if the terms as if etc are used I read it that way. Now even at that there is debate as to whether the term Yom used in Genesis means a 24 hour day or not. ( literalists aren't monolithic in their thinking.) as well as the extent of the flood etc.

Answer 9

Some people interpret the Bible the way they want to see it. You are saying "there is no flood - it's just a parable". Usually Jesus told people when he was telling a parable.

Answer 10

What lesson would the six-day creation teach if it was not true?

I believe the WHOLE Bible, I don't just pick and choose what I want to believe.