A true Christian knows that GOD'S WORD must be read literally!?

Question

If you believe the scripture is true, then you must subordinate all other sources to second place. So, if science seems to contradict Scripture, then it must be science that is wrong. Since no man was there at the beginning, we can only guess what happened. But since God was there, and he told us what happened, we should believe God, not men.

CHRISTIANS: do you agree?

LIberal Christians who try to read the Bible not-literally: what do you say about this???

Answer 1

I am a Christian......
But even I know that basic exegesis must be used when reading & interpreting the Scriptures.

There are some times when you have to know metaphors (for instance: Revelation) ......and others for hyperbole.....and others as literal.

But all in all, the Scriptures are 100% God-breathed & accurate.

Answer 2

Many scripture passages are allegorys, many parables, some even just the opinion of man. Paul speaks of marriage and virgins and tells you it is his own opinion. Later he says divorce is only justified in cases of death or adultery where the innocent one can remarry and he says so saith the Lord indicating it is God's law, not just his opinion.

In the sermon on the mount where it says to "pluck out your eyes" do you take it literally? Some may not realize that the term "pluck out your eyes" was a common Hebraic expression that the Jews would have understood should not be taken literally but was an allegory.

In Genesis on the creation account... the Hebrew word for day (yom) can mean a 24 hr day, a space of time, an era of time. The Bible also teaches that God is timeless, and to God a day is as a 1000 years and a 1000 years is as a day. The creation may have taken billions of human years, and bits and pieces of some evolutionary principles may have been used in the process.

The word wine is translated from 10 different Hebrew and Greek words. Sometimes it is fermented, sometimes new wine (weak), sometimes strong wine, sometimes drugged wine. No matter how careful a translator is, when you translate between languages there is inevitably imperfections introduced into the scriptures.

Jesus says it is easier for a camel to pass through an eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven. Aramaic texts show camel and rope to be the same word.

While the Bible has allegories, parables etc. as well as imperfections due to translational errors, this does not excuse us from rejecting the intrinsic truth contained in the Bible in spite of it's imperfections. Evangelicals tend to worship the Bible as if it was God itself (therefore cannot have any flaws)... instead the Bible is a tool of God. A hammer does not build a house, but the master carpenter who uses a hammer. The hammer may have some nicks and dings from use and age... but it still is a hammer.

Answer 3

well, if you read the bible literally and take everything word for word, which version do you use? They all have slightly different translations. I'll assume KJV as thatis what most literalists use.

If so, and you believe every word in the bible is true then do you think bats are birds? Leviticus 14:11-18
Just one of many examples where the bible is in error.
same for internal contradictions. such as
1 Samuel 17:49-50
David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth. David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him; but there was no sword in the hand of David.

yet

1 Samuel 17:51
David ran, and stood upon the Philistine, and took his sword, and drew it out of the sheath thereof, and slew him,and cut off his head therewith.

did David use a sword or not? one account must be wrong.

Not a problem if it is written by man and mistranslated over history, but for literalists it presents a huge problem.

A good website to find a list of these absurdities is http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

Answer 4

Yes, understanding metaphors in the bible can help us to more easily get at the truth within its pages. Jesus was known as THE GREAT TEACHER and he used metaphors as not only a teaching tool, but as a way of separating people. For instance, do you remember that he said in so many words, my followers will have to drink my blood and eat my flesh? How did these words serve to help Jesus? When Jesus told peter, "Feed my sheep" he didn't mean literal sheep, did he? In the illustration of Lazarus and the rich man the rich man asks Lazarus for just a drop of water. Would a drop of water actually give a burning soul any comfort? This metaphoric parable then should cause us to look harder into what Jesus was saying. Did the rich man and Lazarus represent two people or two classes of people? If they were classes of people, what can we learn using that view?

Answer 5

I am NOT a "liberal christian" by any stretch of the imagination. As a matter of fact, I am a traditionalist Thomist (St. Thomas Aquinas) who always took the Scripture literally (where possible) but "never discount(ed) the allegorical".

Proper exegesis demands this method be applied.

I also believe that taking the Holy Scripture out of the context of the Tradition of the Holy Church is a grave mistake.

The Church, the Body of Christ, gave birth to Holy Writ....not the other way around.

Answer 6

But if the whole bible is literal, then the 1st book is a complete fabrication and places serious doubts of any of it being true. On the other hand, if you take it metaphorically, then you have sever theological problems and the whole thing is still suspect.

Kinda' a bad situation all around....

Answer 7

What you call a "true Christian" is in fact a bible-worshipper. Isn't that idolatry, worshipping a book?

A Christian is a follower of Christ and his teachings. You don't have to believe the dude even existed.

Answer 8

To me, that sounds like a convenient way to ignore things which contradict what I see as the obvious flaws in your religion.

I would also like to point out the dangers of doing that - history is replete with fascist dictators who claimed that any other viewpoint than their one was not to be tolerated.

Also, there is something in the bible about challenging what is in its pages and putting it to the test. If you routinely deny anything that contradicts the bible you cannot carry out that directive.

Answer 9

All scripture is inerrant and inspired. That's not to say it is all literal, you have to study the scriptures to know what is to be taken literally, like the story of the crucifixion and resurrection, and what is metaphor, like the beast with multiple heads from revelation.

Answer 10

I disagree with your statement. A literal translation rejects intelligence.
What makes you think that God wants an automated church of drones who have no thought nor study to the meaning of what is written in His Holy Book?