Is the bible to be taken litrally or metaphorically?

Question

I want to hear all of you views and why you believe that animals do/don't have souls. By why i mean what backs you up your beliefs (ex. religious doctorines)

Answer 1

It is to be taken in whatever way suits the needs of the person when they are trying to spin their latest yarn. In other words, it varies from one day to the next... from one person to the next. it's cool like that.

Sheesh, I prefer Aesop. He didn't leave room for wild interpretation of his fables!

Answer 2

Those are two distinct and separate questions. There are problems with taking the Bible metaphorically as this diminishes its credability and damages many of its doctrines.

Souls do not exist, there is no measurable distinction that we can point to and say "this is a soul, we have it and animals don't." On the other hand, many animals show emotions, self awareness, either follow or break their social norms, and often have regional dialects. All this means that we are not all that different than other animals.

Answer 3

Neither.

The Bible was written by ancient men to be taken literally by other humans.

It contains myths, which should not be taken at the same level of fact.

I find it far more satisfying to consider the bible as the expression of ancient mens' hopes, dreams, hatreds, and feelings about their world. A book is the doorway to the culture and society that helped to create it. I do not take the stories in the bible as literal scientific or historical accounts -- to do so would belittle the real world and the human values in such a text. And it would negate our own ability to reason and to see the mistakes of the past.

Answer 4

How you read a part of the Bible depends on what part you're reading. Revelation, for example, was never meant to be taken literally, and anyone who views it that way is really missing the point. Other books, such as Paul's letter in the New Testament, were meant to be taken on face value, since they were actual letters to actual churches (though the authorship is greatly debated or flat-out rejected for some of the letters). So it depends which books you're talking about.

Answer 5

The Bible is to be taken literly, metapahoicaly, & symbolic, The bible is not a novel but a library of 66 small books, with a common theme, animals do not have souls & Men & animals are the same both ARE SOULS & both have spirits that perish at death
(Ecclesiastes 3:18-21) . . . I, even I, have said in my heart with regard to the sons of mankind that the [true] God is going to select them, that they may see that they themselves are beasts. 19 For there is an eventuality as respects the sons of mankind and an eventuality as respects the beast, and they have the same eventuality. As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit, so that there is no superiority of the man over the beast, for everything is vanity. 20 All are going to one place. They have all come to be from the dust, and they are all returning to the dust. 21 Who is there knowing the spirit of the sons of mankind, whether it is ascending upward; and the spirit of the beast, whether it is descending downward to the earth. . .

(Ecclesiastes 9:5) 5 For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten.

can it be clearer then that?

Answer 6

It cannot be taken literally; that would mean believing things which are known to be fallacious (such as the great flood). One may choose to take it metaphorically, but one must then defend one's own interpretation as opposed to anyone else's, and it is easy to see that no such defense can be demonstrably correct. As for souls, the concept is strictly fiction, from which it follows at once that animals don't have them.

Answer 7

I do believe that animals have souls.

The Bible is not a single book. Whether the reading is literal or symbolic depends on the passage. Some are meant to be read literally, and some are meant to be read symbolically.

Answer 8

To some extent, I believe we have "style," so to speak. That no matter what body our brain is in, it will still think in the same way.

I don't know that I'd say we each have a soul. But we each have our own "power," so to speak. The power to speak intellectually, to be persuasive, to love, to laugh. Emotion, I guess; just in an altered, oversimplified form.

Answer 9

How do you metaphorically take stuff like "bats are birds" and "rabbits have cuds".

The bible says this. So its nonsensical

Answer 10

I'm just glad Lewis Carrol wasn't around when the Bible was being written.