In a way I understand the people who take the Bible literally

[johnsweeting]

I'm an Atheist so maybe the topic (In a way I understand the people who take the Bible literally) sounds a little weird...Let me explain...
So I was debating a "soft" Christian the other day about the Bible.
He doesn't take the Bible literally but told me that many things in the Bible are there to tell us a story about life. I then started to talk about the most extreme stories of the Bible:
1. The talking snake
2. Lot’s wife who turns into a pillar of salt
3. (There are many extreme stories I could have told here)

He said that those two stories should not be taken literally...I then said:
- You have a story in the Bible that's describing the talking snake and the woman who turn into salt.
If they are not true (literally) and are there to tell us a story then those two stories are made up......period...end of story..

How can you then determine which parts of the Bible are true and which are "made up" to tell a story about life (as people describe it).

Should we then go thru each sentence of Bible and say something like this:
That is true
That is telling a story (made up)
That is also telling a story (made up)
That is true
That is also telling a story (made up)
That is also telling a story (made up)
etc.
etc.

What is the difference then between the Bible and Harry Potter? Maybe Harry Potter was written by J.K Rowland to tell us a story of life in general and should not be taken literally....
If you take the Bible literally it's much harder to debate because the people who take it literally just say "It's all true" in which I have nothing to reply but to say how they in 2013 can believe in a talking snake and a woman that turn into salt.
In which they say "We do". I was debating a Baptist on Twitter a month ago and he said both stories were literally true.

It is easier to defend that the Bible is literally true and therefore my topic...

Any Feedback......?

 

[Chuckt]

He said that those two stories should not be taken literally...I then said:
- You have a story in the Bible that's describing the talking snake and the woman who turn into salt.
If they are not true (literally) and are there to tell us a story then those two stories are made up......period...end of story..

How can you then determine which parts of the Bible are true and which are "made up" to tell a story about life (as people describe it).

We are separated from God because sin separates us from God.
Through sin came the curse.
We are spiritually dead.
Satan is the god of this world.

Those are three or four variables because all three can change things down here and the question is what is life as it should be or was meant to be and is it operating like that today?

 

[lizzie]

I don't tend to take much of the Bible literally at all. As essentially all religious texts, the Bible was written by people who were looking for answers to the big questions in life. I am fairly certain that it was inspired, but am not sure of what the source of inspiration was, just as I don't understand the source of inspiration for artists, writers, and other creative individuals, but I do believe there is value in religious texts, just as I find value in great works of art.

 

[lizzie]

He said that those two stories should not be taken literally...I then said:
- You have a story in the Bible that's describing the talking snake and the woman who turn into salt.
If they are not true (literally) and are there to tell us a story then those two stories are made up......period...end of story..

How can you then determine which parts of the Bible are true and which are "made up" to tell a story about life (as people describe it).

We are separated from God because sin separates us from God.
Through sin came the curse.
We are spiritually dead.
Satan is the god of this world.

I find that idea rather odd, and not compatible with my own experiences in life. I don't think that I am separated from God in the least, and in fact think that I am a part of God, whatever God may be. Of course, my expectations in life are not of continual perfection and happiness, but more along the lines of reality, as humans are capable of perceiving it. I reject the idea that we are spiritually dead at all. Maybe some of us can't see the beauty in being human, but I can.

 

[johnsweeting]

He said that those two stories should not be taken literally...I then said:
- You have a story in the Bible that's describing the talking snake and the woman who turn into salt.
If they are not true (literally) and are there to tell us a story then those two stories are made up......period...end of story..

How can you then determine which parts of the Bible are true and which are "made up" to tell a story about life (as people describe it).

We are separated from God because sin separates us from God.
Through sin came the curse.
We are spiritually dead.
Satan is the god of this world.

Those are three or four variables because all three can change things down here and the question is what is life as it should be or was meant to be and is it operating like that today?

Your answer is the reason why I'm an Atheist. Strange quotes to my questions but what did I expect from hardcore Christians...

 

[theword]

I'm an Atheist so maybe the topic (In a way I understand the people who take the Bible literally) sounds a little weird...Let me explain...
So I was debating a "soft" Christian the other day about the Bible.
He doesn't take the Bible literally but told me that many things in the Bible are there to tell us a story about life. I then started to talk about the most extreme stories of the Bible:
1. The talking snake
2. Lot’s wife who turns into a pillar of salt
3. (There are many extreme stories I could have told here)

He said that those two stories should not be taken literally...I then said:
- You have a story in the Bible that's describing the talking snake and the woman who turn into salt.
If they are not true (literally) and are there to tell us a story then those two stories are made up......period...end of story..

How can you then determine which parts of the Bible are true and which are "made up" to tell a story about life (as people describe it).

Should we then go thru each sentence of Bible and say something like this:
That is true
That is telling a story (made up)
That is also telling a story (made up)
That is true
That is also telling a story (made up)
That is also telling a story (made up)
etc.
etc.

What is the difference then between the Bible and Harry Potter? Maybe Harry Potter was written by J.K Rowland to tell us a story of life in general and should not be taken literally....
If you take the Bible literally it's much harder to debate because the people who take it literally just say "It's all true" in which I have nothing to reply but to say how they in 2013 can believe in a talking snake and a woman that turn into salt.
In which they say "We do". I was debating a Baptist on Twitter a month ago and he said both stories were literally true.

It is easier to defend that the Bible is literally true and therefore my topic...

Any Feedback......?

The literal Bible readers are as clueless as the one's who try interpret the symbolism within the prophecies without God interpreting them through His chosen saints. Liars don't know the difference between worldly knowledge and heavenly knowledge so they like the worldly knowledge that they're comfortable with, like communion, water baptism, building churches ( false gods ) and golden altars, buying cars and homes that they think come from their Jesus ( false god ).

 

[loa]

Here is my take on your question, John Sweeting:

You probably know some of this, but since I do not know you, I'll include it just in case:

The Bible is actually 66 different books with many different authors spanning a large amount of time. In this complied book, there are many different literary devices - poetry, allegory, parables, law, history, groupings of wise sayings, prophecies and you also find information about the world that was written within segments of history, so the ideas are sort of cemented that way - meaning, no one had today's science five thousand years ago, so you won't find 'modern' science in the Bible. To me? It's not quite so easy to dismiss the entire book out of hand, as it seems you do when asking what is the difference between Harry Potter and the Bible. Also, please do not take offense at the term 'dismiss' - there is no judgment of idea when I use that term.

The reason people believe the Bible is ENTIRELY literal is because they believe people inspired by God's spirit wrote it. I believe that also, but I also believe it is possible to determine what 'sort' of literary device in particular you are reading in the Bible and consider from there.
That is why some will say the snake was real and some will say it is a literary device. Same for the 'Job's wife being turned into salt' story. Personally, I think how people view that question depends on what they know about literature, how comfortable they are with dealing with the ambivalence of ethereal idea - spirit inspired humans being the starter on it.

Ultimately, the Bible is a spiritual handbook, designed for people to use for their own spiritual growth.

Hope that helps - at the very least, your post was interesting reading for me, anyway.

K.

 

[CMike]

I am jewish and we take the bible literally.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The literal Bible readers are as clueless as the one's who try interpret the symbolism within the prophecies without God interpreting them through His chosen saints. Liars don't know the difference between worldly knowledge and heavenly knowledge . . . .

And we witness TheWord as a liar, unaware of the sacred and the profane, etc.

Always turn the mirror around on such, and you will see them as the symbols of what they denounce.

 

[loa]

Hi Mike,

You said:
I am jewish and we take the bible literally.

Reply:

But I am sure there are some things you don't take literally - for instance, is everything in poems that are written in the Bible taken literally? When David said darkness was his best friend, was that metaphor or was that literal?

I actually think asking whether the Bible is literal is the wrong question. A better question is whether one accepts its authority.

So, there are things in the Bible I do not take literally - I don't think people actually swallow camels, nor do I think we should cut off our right hands if they offend us, etc - I accept them as metaphor and I still respect the authority of the Book. I don't think a bat is a bird, but totally understand why someone might write that in the period of history they did. Knowing this doesn't create disrespect of its spiritual authority.

K.

 

[CMike]

Hi Mike,

You said:
I am jewish and we take the bible literally.

Reply:

But I am sure there are some things you don't take literally - for instance, is everything in poems that are written in the Bible taken literally? When David said darkness was his best friend, was that metaphor or was that literal?

I actually think asking whether the Bible is literal is the wrong question. A better question is whether one accepts its authority.

So, there are things in the Bible I do not take literally - I don't think people actually swallow camels, nor do I think we should cut off our right hands if they offend us, etc - I accept them as metaphor and I still respect the authority of the Book. I don't think a bat is a bird, but totally understand why someone might write that in the period of history they did. Knowing this doesn't create disrespect of its spiritual authority.

K.

David wrote psalms in a poetic and flowerly way.

I am not sure what you mean by swalling a camel,a bat is a bird, or cutting off right hands.

Perhpas you can quote the passages. I am only talking about the Torah.

 

[Moonglow]

I am jewish and we take the bible literally.

Still stoning blasphemer's to death?

 

[CMike]

I am jewish and we take the bible literally.

Still stoning blasphemer's to death?

The criteria in the Torah to implement the death penalty is so high it made it virtually impossible to do.

In fact, a jewish court that implemented the death penalty more than once in 70 years was considered a blood thirsty court.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I am jewish and we take the bible literally.

I am a Gentile Christian who is inwardly a Jew and I take the Jewish bible literally too. Every single word of it.

 

[loa]

CMike,
When you replied by saying King David wrote in a flowery, poetic way, you were actually agreeing with what I said - not every single verse of the Book is intended literally. Knowing this does not take away the Book's authority or hinder someone from using it properly.

Jeremiah,
With all respect, I do not believe you take EVERY SINGLE word of the Book literally. If so, have you gouged out your right eye? Cut off your right hand? Do you hate your mother and father and brothers and sister? Do you separate yourself from men once a month? Do you allow harm to yourself that duplicates harm done to another? Probably not, to each of those.

Again - I don't think the right question is asking if someone takes the Book literally - there are too many instances in which the literary devices used are not intended to be used literally. Again, the better question is whether one accepts its authority.

Figurative and symbolic language can be extremely powerful. Knowing the Book contains this sort of writing doesn't prevent one from accepting its spiritual authority.

K.

 

[editec]

Debates between non believers and believers are a complete waste of everybody's time.

Seeking to do so logically is silliness to the extreme.