Bible Literalists Please Explain . . .

[Muffled]

.

. . . where you get the impression that the Bible is to be taken literally. Is there some passage that clearly instructs the reader to take every word, idea, and account literally?

.

2Tim 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

I believe literal means to me what is written was meant to be written not intended to be a subterfuge for something else. So stories are literal stories, not history. They are literally stories. Reports of conversations are reports and not stories. Reports are literally reports.

 

[Muffled]

If physical death entered the world through the sins of Adam then there shouldn’t be fossils of dead creatures older than the first humans. And yet there clearly are, so why do people take such an unscientific interpretation of the Bible to be true? Beats me...

I believe it is due to a lack of understanding of context. The OT has a main theme of telling about the Adamic race and not the rest of the world unless the other parts of the world relate to the Adamic race. The other thing the OT does is tell us about God which also does not have to include info about the whole world.

 

[Muffled]

I think you just have to look at the context. For instance, it seems pretty obvious that G-d wasn't promising that he would give the land of Canaan to Abraham's semen. So probably not literal. On the other hand, there's no reason to not understand that there wasn't a literal prophetic experience taking place in which G-d iterated His promise to Abraham that his children would be given the land.

I believe children is not as meaningful as seed. All the offspring will share the DNA to some extent.

 

[Tumah]

I believe children is not as meaningful as seed. All the offspring will share the DNA to some extent.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[2ndpillar]

2Tim 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

I believe literal means to me what is written was meant to be written not intended to be a subterfuge for something else. So stories are literal stories, not history. They are literally stories. Reports of conversations are reports and not stories. Reports are literally reports.

You seem to be taking your false prophet Paul's comments out of context. 2 Timothy 3:16 refers to 2 Timothy 3:15, which is the "sacred writings", "you have known from childhood", which would be the Law and the prophets, and which undermines your further assertions, that they are "literal reports". Prophesy is not a report, but a prophecy of future events. As for "subterfuge", most of it was hidden from "wicked" (Daniel 2:12) and "those without ears to hear (Isaiah 6:9-10) & (Matthew 13:13).

 

[CohenDavidson]

.

. . . where you get the impression that the Bible is to be taken literally. Is there some passage that clearly instructs the reader to take every word, idea, and account literally?

.

Great question! This perhaps is a pertinent question considering the times we live in today. Its not that we are told to believe the Bible is literal by any written verses or commands in the Bible, it is this. In the context of the Bible, everything has to be taken literally to make sense. Consider this tough for a moment. Would their be any need for Jesus's sacrifice on the cross if sin and death were no issue? I would argue their would be no need considering that was what Jesus came to solve... our sin problem. If Jesus was a historical character who did live on this Earth, which many credible historians and even atheist will admit, then we have to dig a little deeper. Who was Jesus and what do we know about him and his life? Well, historians also are aware of his birth taking place in and his early life taking place in Nazareth. They also are aware of his followers who were called apostles within the context of the Bible. They are also aware of his historical death taking place by the hand of the Roman Empire. STAY WITH ME, I promise Im getting somewhere. Now lets consider the literal meaning of the Bible. If all of these things are true historically about Jesus, wouldn't it be helpful if their were prophesies about his coming that would confirm the things we know about Jesus historically? I would think so! Prophecies tell of these things, specifically about Jesus being a Nazarene, his crucifixion, and no many other things. If prophecies match the historical Jesus, we have a case worth considering. If Jesus did come to earth to same man from sin and death, we have to believe the Adam and Eve story as well as the cases of Jesus performing miracles and the rest of the Bible. This is because the Adam and Eve story is why we have this problem that Jesus had to come and fix and if Jesus was who he said he was, he no doubt is able to perform miracles. Perhaps other reasons as well, but thats the basis of the explanation. Hope this something worth considering!

 

[Skwim]

Great question! This perhaps is a pertinent question considering the times we live in today. Its not that we are told to believe the Bible is literal by any written verses or commands in the Bible, it is this. In the context of the Bible, everything has to be taken literally to make sense.

Unfortunately, taking a lot of scripture literally doesn't make sense. There are simply too many instances of contradictions, bad science,
bad history, and so forth.

Consider this tough for a moment. Would their be any need for Jesus's sacrifice on the cross if sin and death were no issue? I would argue their would be no need considering that was what Jesus came to solve... our sin problem. If Jesus was a historical character who did live on this Earth, which many credible historians and even atheist will admit, then we have to dig a little deeper. Who was Jesus and what do we know about him and his life? Well, historians also are aware of his birth taking place in and his early life taking place in Nazareth. They also are aware of his followers who were called apostles within the context of the Bible. They are also aware of his historical death taking place by the hand of the Roman Empire.

Again, unfortunately, this just isn't the case. There is next to no extrabiblical writings identifying Jesus, much less anything noting any of his activities. Even Josephus, born in 37CE, and Tacitus, born in 55 CE, (men never contemporaneous with Jesus) who Christians often cite as supporting the Jesus story, are hardly reliable. The only source backing up the Bible is the Bible itself, a book so riddled with faults, that cherry-picking is a foregone necessity if one is going to build one's faith out of it.

Did you know that, depending on what Bible you read, there are at least nine different renderings of the Hebrew "ra" in Isaiah 45:7.

"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil."
​

Other translations include.

"Bad times"
"Calamity"
"Disaster(s)"
"Discord"
"Doom".
"Hard times"
"Troubles"
"Woe"
​

Think they're synonyms? They're not.


And that in Philippians 3:8 where one reads

". . . Because of Christ, I lost all these things, and now I know that they are all worthless dung. . . . "
​

in other Bibles " Dung" is rendered as

"refuse" 4 times
"garbage" 10 times
"rubbish" 13 times
"filth" 2 times
"trash" 6 times
"worthless" 2 times
"less than nothing" 3 times
"manure" 1 time
"waste" 1 time
"dirt" 1 time
"sewer trash" 1 time.​

Think they're synonyms? They're not. Thing is, it shows one can't depend on what the Bible says.

Now lets consider the literal meaning of the Bible. If all of these things are true historically about Jesus, wouldn't it be helpful if their were prophesies about his coming that would confirm the things we know about Jesus historically? I would think so! Prophecies tell of these things, specifically about Jesus being a Nazarene, his crucifixion, and no many other things.

Just what are these "prophecies [that] tell of these things, specifically about Jesus being a Nazarene, his crucifixion, and no many other things"?

If prophecies match the historical Jesus, we have a case worth considering.

I await these unequivocal prophecies. What ya got?

If Jesus did come to earth to same man from sin and death, we have to believe the Adam and Eve story as well as the cases of Jesus performing miracles and the rest of the Bible. This is because the Adam and Eve story is why we have this problem that Jesus had to come and fix and if Jesus was who he said he was, he no doubt is able to perform miracles. Perhaps other reasons as well, but thats the basis of the explanation. Hope this something worth considering!

And, of course, who would spin tales about Jesus that were not in accord with the OT stories? No one.

.

 

[CohenDavidson]

Unfortunately, taking a lot of scripture literally doesn't make sense. There are simply too many instances of contradictions, bad science,
bad history, and so forth.

I need examples... I have sen many instances if claimed "contradiction" that have been disproven many times... Give Examples! Bad science? the Bible revealed many things about science that have very recently been found o be true by science... for example, vitamin K being peak level on day 8 Genesis 17:12, the Earth being shaped round Isaiah 40:22, The blood of a human being the thing that gives life Leviticus 17:11, so on and so forth.

Again, unfortunately, this just isn't the case. There is next to no extrabiblical writings identifying Jesus, much less anything noting any of his activities. Even Josephus, born in 37CE, and Tacitus, born in 55 CE, (men never contemporaneous with Jesus) who Christians often cite as supporting the Jesus story, are hardly reliable. The only source backing up the Bible is the Bible itself, a book so riddled with faults, that cherry-picking is a foregone necessity if one is going to build one's faith out of it.

I will hold my position... We have writings also from Pliny the Younger, mentions within the Babylonian Talmud, and mentions from Lucian of Samosata. Richard Dawkins even admits Jesus was a historical character. Why is is that when we come to Jesus, people can be shown every type of evidence and not be convinced? Im not sure. And even when we give examples, "those people aren't reliable". Alexander the Great is never denied as being a historical character, but he wasn't mentioned by historians until nearly 200 years after his death. It is quite dishonest to say Jesus was never a historical character wether you believe he was divine or not. And again... you make claims with no support.

Did you know that, depending on what Bible you read, there are at least nine different renderings of the Hebrew "ra" in Isaiah 45:7.

"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil."
Other translations include.

"Bad times"
"Calamity"
"Disaster(s)"
"Discord"
"Doom".
"Hard times"
"Troubles"
"Woe"
Think they're synonyms? They're not.


And that in Philippians 3:8 where one reads

". . . Because of Christ, I lost all these things, and now I know that they are all worthless dung. . . . "
in other Bibles " Dung" is rendered as

"refuse" 4 times
"garbage" 10 times
"rubbish" 13 times
"filth" 2 times
"trash" 6 times
"worthless" 2 times
"less than nothing" 3 times
"manure" 1 time
"waste" 1 time
"dirt" 1 time
"sewer trash" 1 time.
Think they're synonyms? They're not. Thing is, it shows one can't depend on what the Bible says.

Im not sure what your trying to say? I do not deny that many translations that exist are inaccurate. Look at the Queen James Version for instance. This is not to say that the original text I not accurate.

Just what are these "prophecies [that] tell of these things, specifically about Jesus being a Nazarene, his crucifixion, and no many other things"?

Consider this website that gives some prophecies about Jesus and many we know came to pass by history(man of Nazarene, crucifixion, and many other things) Please seriously consider. These are not vague descriptions

All I'm saying is that so much goes together within the Bible and history, it could by no means be a coincidence. Go to this website and look at this picture... its really cool stuff!
Holy infographics: the bible visualised

 

[Skwim]

I need examples... I have sen many instances if claimed "contradiction" that have been disproven many times...

CONTRADICTIONS

1,300,000 Vs 1,570,000 men

2 Samuel 24:9
9 And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men. [800,000 & 500,000]

1 Chronicles 21:5
5 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.[1,100,000 & 470,000.]​

+++++++++++++++++++++++

420 talents Vs 450 talents

1 Kings 9:28
28 And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to king Solomon.

2 Chronicles 8:18
18 And Huram sent him by the hands of his servants ships, and servants that had knowledge of the sea; and they went with the servants of Solomon to Ophir, and took thence four hundred and fifty talents of gold, and brought them to king Solomon.​

Give Examples! Bad science?

SCIENCE

Lev 11:13-19
13 “You must also treat some birds as things that are wrong to eat. Stay away from them. It is a sickening thought for you to eat any of these birds: eagles, vultures, buzzards, 14 kites, all kinds of falcons, 15 all kinds of black birds, 16 ostriches, nighthawks, sea gulls, all kinds of hawks, 17 owls, cormorants, great owls, 18 water hens, pelicans, carrion vultures, 19 storks, all kinds of herons, hoopoes, and bats.​

Bat's ain't birds.

+++++++++++++++++

Lev. 11:6
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.​

Hares don't produce cud.

the Bible revealed many things about science that have very recently been found o be true by science... for example, vitamin K being peak level on day 8 Genesis 17:12,

Genesis 17:12
12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.​

?????????????????????????

the Earth being shaped round

.

Isaiah 40:22
22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

​

Vs

Isaiah 11:12
And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
​

Seems old Isaiah can't make up his mind, but nice cherry picking anyway.

The blood of a human being the thing that gives life Leviticus 17:11,

Think this wasn't known before ? That when people lose enough blood they die? You may as well have said The Bible foretold gravity because:

Isaiah 34:4
All the host of heaven shall rot away, and the skies roll up like a scroll. All their host shall fall, as leaves fall from the vine, like leaves falling from the fig tree.​

I will hold my position... We have writings also from Pliny the Younger, mentions within the Babylonian Talmud, and mentions from Lucian of Samosata.

Fine. Let's see them.

Richard Dawkins even admits Jesus was a historical character.

So what!. Donal Trump said he will be responsible for shutting down the government . . . .errr, no. The Democrats are responsible. Citing the beliefs of Richard Dawkins is as meaningless as any Trump pronouncement.

Why is is that when we come to Jesus, people can be shown every type of evidence and not be convinced?

Every type but the convincing type. Any convincing lies in setting rationality aside, and buying into unsupported claims of truth. Ask yourself: what evidence has convinced me that Jesus is my savior (I'm assuming this is what you believe.). Then ask yourself if this evidence is totally rational or not. If it isn't then there's no reason to expect it should convince others. If it is totally rational, then please share.

And even when we give examples, "those people aren't reliable". Alexander the Great is never denied as being a historical character, but he wasn't mentioned by historians until nearly 200 years after his death.

Perhaps that's because

"There are numerous surviving ancient Greek and Latin sources on Alexander the Great, king of Macedon, as well as some oriental texts. The five main surviving accounts are by Arrian, Plutarch, Diodorus, Curtius and Justin. In addition to these five main sources, there is the Metz Epitome, an anonymous late Latin work that narrates Alexander's campaigns from Hyrcania to India. Much is also recounted incidentally by other authors, including Strabo, Athenaeus, Polyaenus, Aelian, and others. Strabo, who gives a summary of Callisthenes, is an important source for Alexander's journey to Siwah.
source: Wikipedia​

It is quite dishonest to say Jesus was never a historical character wether you believe he was divine or not. And again... you make claims with no support.

And, it is quite dishonest to say I said Jesus was never a historical character. I said "there is next to no extrabiblical writings identifying Jesus, much less anything noting any of his activities. I readily admit that the Bible identifies Jesus. Hopefully you recognize the difference.

Im not sure what your trying to say? I do not deny that many translations that exist are inaccurate. Look at the Queen James Version for instance. This is not to say that the original text I not accurate.

I'm trying to get you to see that taking the Bible literally is foolish. But, just so I'm straightened around here, exactly which Bible is the accurate Bible? And how do you know this to be a fact?

Consider this website that gives some prophecies about Jesus and many we know came to pass by history(man of Nazarene, crucifixion, and many other things) Please seriously consider. These are not vague descriptions

Far, far too time consuming for me to even begin to care.

All I'm saying is that so much goes together within the Bible and history, it could by no means be a coincidence. Go to this website and look at this picture... its really cool stuff!
Holy infographics: the bible visualised

Ever hear of self fulfilling prophecies? Think the writers of the NT weren't compelled, if not obligated, to show the prophecies of old as being fulfilled? Of course they were, They were trying to sell Jesus as the prophesied messiah, so naturally their writings were devised to show just that. And the fact that the Bible was put together, often under the whims and pressure of the reining monarch who commissioned it or the interests of the Church, AND its books voted upon, one might wonder just why it's given any credence at all. Although I don't wonder about such things, I know why it's given credence: NEED.

.

 

[Muffled]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

My son has a child but there is no DNA connection. She is not his seed but she is his child.

 

[Muffled]

You seem to be taking your false prophet Paul's comments out of context. 2 Timothy 3:16 refers to 2 Timothy 3:15, which is the "sacred writings", "you have known from childhood", which would be the Law and the prophets, and which undermines your further assertions, that they are "literal reports". Prophesy is not a report, but a prophecy of future events. As for "subterfuge", most of it was hidden from "wicked" (Daniel 2:12) and "those without ears to hear (Isaiah 6:9-10) & (Matthew 13:13).

I believe there is absolutely no grounds for that opinion.

I believe that is a non-sequitur.

I believe reports are literal reports. I believe laws are literal laws. I believe prophecies are literal prophecies.

What I mean is that a fig tree bears fruit and is not a palm tree in Florida bearing coconuts. What I am saying is that what is written is legitimate but what people try to say something is saying other than what is written is not some subterfuge in the text.

 

[Tumah]

My son has a child but there is no DNA connection. She is not his seed but she is his child.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, and going through the chain of comments, I'm not quite clear that you are either.

 

[Muffled]

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, and going through the chain of comments, I'm not quite clear that you are either.

I believe what I am saying is that the text is reliable the way it is. It doesn't have to be interpreted as a message to go to the post office on tuesday. Reading all kinds of outrageous interpretations into scripture is not literalism but the opposite and sometimes it is called symbolism but that is only part of the problem.

 

[Subduction Zone]

CONTRADICTIONS

1,300,000 Vs 1,570,000 men

2 Samuel 24:9
9 And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men. [800,000 & 500,000]

1 Chronicles 21:5
5 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.[1,100,000 & 470,000.]​

+++++++++++++++++++++++

420 talents Vs 450 talents

1 Kings 9:28
28 And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to king Solomon.

2 Chronicles 8:18
18 And Huram sent him by the hands of his servants ships, and servants that had knowledge of the sea; and they went with the servants of Solomon to Ophir, and took thence four hundred and fifty talents of gold, and brought them to king Solomon.​

SCIENCE

Lev 11:13-19
13 “You must also treat some birds as things that are wrong to eat. Stay away from them. It is a sickening thought for you to eat any of these birds: eagles, vultures, buzzards, 14 kites, all kinds of falcons, 15 all kinds of black birds, 16 ostriches, nighthawks, sea gulls, all kinds of hawks, 17 owls, cormorants, great owls, 18 water hens, pelicans, carrion vultures, 19 storks, all kinds of herons, hoopoes, and bats.​

Bat's ain't birds.

+++++++++++++++++

Lev. 11:6
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.​

Hares don't produce cud.

Genesis 17:12
12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.​

?????????????????????????


.

Isaiah 40:22
22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

​

Vs

Isaiah 11:12
And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
​

Seems old Isaiah can't make up his mind, but nice cherry picking anyway.


Think this wasn't known before ? That when people lose enough blood they die? You may as well have said The Bible foretold gravity because:

Isaiah 34:4
All the host of heaven shall rot away, and the skies roll up like a scroll. All their host shall fall, as leaves fall from the vine, like leaves falling from the fig tree.​

Fine. Let's see them.


So what!. Donal Trump said he will be responsible for shutting down the government . . . .errr, no. The Democrats are responsible. Citing the beliefs of Richard Dawkins is as meaningless as any Trump pronouncement.


Every type but the convincing type. Any convincing lies in setting rationality aside, and buying into unsupported claims of truth. Ask yourself: what evidence has convinced me that Jesus is my savior (I'm assuming this is what you believe.). Then ask yourself if this evidence is totally rational or not. If it isn't then there's no reason to expect it should convince others. If it is totally rational, then please share.


Perhaps that's because

"There are numerous surviving ancient Greek and Latin sources on Alexander the Great, king of Macedon, as well as some oriental texts. The five main surviving accounts are by Arrian, Plutarch, Diodorus, Curtius and Justin. In addition to these five main sources, there is the Metz Epitome, an anonymous late Latin work that narrates Alexander's campaigns from Hyrcania to India. Much is also recounted incidentally by other authors, including Strabo, Athenaeus, Polyaenus, Aelian, and others. Strabo, who gives a summary of Callisthenes, is an important source for Alexander's journey to Siwah.
source: Wikipedia​

And, it is quite dishonest to say I said Jesus was never a historical character. I said "there is next to no extrabiblical writings identifying Jesus, much less anything noting any of his activities. I readily admit that the Bible identifies Jesus. Hopefully you recognize the difference.


I'm trying to get you to see that taking the Bible literally is foolish. But, just so I'm straightened around here, exactly which Bible is the accurate Bible? And how do you know this to be a fact?


Far, far too time consuming for me to even begin to care.


Ever hear of self fulfilling prophecies? Think the writers of the NT weren't compelled, if not obligated, to show the prophecies of old as being fulfilled? Of course they were, They were trying to sell Jesus as the prophesied messiah, so naturally their writings were devised to show just that. And the fact that the Bible was put together, often under the whims and pressure of the reining monarch who commissioned it or the interests of the Church, AND its books voted upon, one might wonder just why it's given any credence at all. Although I don't wonder about such things, I know why it's given credence: NEED.

.

Isaiah 40 22 describes a Flat Earth if read properly. It describes a circle, not a sphere. Still an example of the Bible screwing up.