-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christian: Should the Bible be read literally?
- Thread starter Green Gaia
- Start date
I agree with ZooGirl02, some parts are literal stories while others are not. Job, for instance, is not a literal story.
In these times, we are not living under the old Law, but are living in the age of Grace. Many of the laws refer to the customs of that time and not of this age. However, God's Word is the same yesterday, today and for ever and we ought to pay heed to doctrinal laws of the old testament, for they are just as valid today, and are still a guide for us to follow. To answer the question, the Bible should be taken literally, but a deep understanding of the Word is required to put together God's plan and purpose. The Book of Revelation highlights the symbology used in this book and should not be taken literally, as the symbols refer to times and events since 96AD. To understand the symbols, you need to refer back to the first-mentioned words in the Bible and have a good knowledge of history.
If you are a Spirit-filled Christian, the Bible opens itself to you and you are able to discern what God's Word means in relation to today's world. Let the Holy Spirit be your guide.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
One should not read the texts literalistically in many cases, because that's not the way the authors intended them to be understood.
Additionally, we have to understand that we are not the intended audience. We have inherited these texts from people who were in completely different circumstances that we those in which we find ourselves.
Additionally, we have to understand that we are not the intended audience. We have inherited these texts from people who were in completely different circumstances that we those in which we find ourselves.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Well then...
I guess I haven't been reading it all these years and acing all my coursework...
Dunemeister
Well-Known Member
Biblical scholars mean by a literal interpretation one that takes into account the literary genre, figures of speech, context, and author/audience perspective in deriving the intended meaning. By this definition, poetry and allegory are literally interpreted as figurative. Others (generally not scholars) use literal in its more common definition where a literal interpretation is one that adheres to the precise definition of words without figurative meaning and without requiring additional context to understand. This latter procedure is what leads some Christians to hold some pretty bizarre views (e.g., that evolutionary theory is an atheistic conspiracy to banish God -- or at least Christians -- from science).
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
The bible is a collection of 66 books (73 if you are Catholic) which were written over a many centuries by a wide variety of people. They encompass many different literary styles.
Without exception (and with very little effort) each book's literary style is easy to determine. Then things become pretty simple - just like any other book, you decipher the meanings based on the literary style, the historical context, the nuances of the original language, the audience, and the author's perspective. There are many, many tools and resources readily available to help deepen one's understanding of the bible, but I encourage you to do this:
Pick it up and read it.
People make it a lot more complicated than it has to be.
Without exception (and with very little effort) each book's literary style is easy to determine. Then things become pretty simple - just like any other book, you decipher the meanings based on the literary style, the historical context, the nuances of the original language, the audience, and the author's perspective. There are many, many tools and resources readily available to help deepen one's understanding of the bible, but I encourage you to do this:
Pick it up and read it.
People make it a lot more complicated than it has to be.
Dunemeister
Well-Known Member
Just a word of caution. Your quote, in a nutshell, is the fundamentalist perspective. Now, I'm not accusing you of being a fundamentalist, but a fundamentalist would be quite at home with this statement. True, they go on to make the bible less complicated than it should be -- thereby creating more complications, of course. But they comfort themselves in this by saying that theirs is a "simpler" or "more straightforward" reading of the text. Separated as we are from these texts by milennia and thousands of kilometers, it should come as no surprise that interpretation is not simple or straightforward, that it actually is a complicated and subtle business, that just picking it up and reading it doesn't actually give us the wherewithal to understand what we're reading. And so interpretation requires more. It actually requires taking up those resources you mentioned earlier in your post. Obviously, not everyone will have the time or inclination to do so; such people should read the bible, sure, but they should subject their interpretations to those who do have the time and inclination to use the resources available to interpret (and who, in turn, have subjected their own interpretations to others who take the texts seriously).
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Why are we debating a 2004 thread again...?
futurezambian
New Member
I agree with you that we are removed from the text and that thus the interpretation is more difficult, but just a question. If we are so far separated from these texts what makes us think that the people writing these interpretation helps understand any better. Who are we, two-thousand years later, to decide what the writers meant when they wrote something. If we truly believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, why are we questioning whether God will reveal the meaning of His words in scripture.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Because those people have spent years reading the original languages, studying archaeology and culture, and spent a considerable amount of time in the practice of criticism of various kinds. Because we are not ancient Judeans and Greeks, we always read through the lens of our own meaning and understanding. It takes years of study and practice to learn how to lay those biases aside, plus the professional networking with other scholars.
As to your last sentence (in red), since the scriptures are polyvalent, I don't know what you're trying to say.
futurezambian
New Member
While the scriptures are polyvalent, the meaning is not. When taken in context there can only be one meaning interpreted from a verse. Application is subject the person reading.
If all the scriptures can have more than one possible meaning how can we base any solid beliefs on what is written? How can we say that we have the right answer and then turn around and then say, "But, it could also mean this."
If all the scriptures can have more than one possible meaning how can we base any solid beliefs on what is written? How can we say that we have the right answer and then turn around and then say, "But, it could also mean this."
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
The meaning is absolutely polyvalent. That's why legitimate interpretations can be made either for or against slavery, homosexuality, women in preaching roles, the nature of the Trinity, the nature of salvation, the nature of the Eucharist, etc. Since proper interpretation and exegesis is undertaken in context, and not verse-by verse, each verse can take on a different meaning based upon context and understanding. Additionally, you're aware that not all Hebrew and Greek words translate. In Romans "Saved by faith in Christ" can just as legitimately be translated "Saved by the faith of Christ," rendering a completely different meaning, hence, polyvalency.
"Solid belief," IMO, isn't reserved for the texts -- it's reserved for God. In other words, the texts weren't written, nor intended to be, infallible.
futurezambian
New Member
Meaning based on context and meaning based on understanding are two totally different things. Context is based on what the writer was trying to say judged from the scriptures and circumstances surrounding it. Understanding is based on personal interpretation and opinion entirely apart from context.
Dunemeister
Well-Known Member
That sounds like misunderstanding to me.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
And there are different meanings that can be legitimately gleaned from exegesis, depending upon several variables over which the exegete has no control, such as ambiguities inherent in the text, or in the translation, where a choice must be made, or wide cultural gulfs wherein certain implied colloquialisms have lost their meaning.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
it is only through Gods holy spirit that true meaning is revealed.
Sometimes man gets it wrong because they are not honest as in the case when they know what an original word means but they apply a different meaning to it...where there is no honesty the holy spirit will not enter and therefore their teaching will always be based on a falsehood.
Sometimes man gets it wrong because they are trying to interpret something which God is not ready to reveal and so they teach something inaccurately for a while until it is revealed and they must be humble and adjust their teaching and admit they were wrong. God allows this because it is a test of mans motives and willingness to let God lead. It also shows that they are being led by holy spirit for when they finally get the true understanding, they immediately make it known and accept it.
Sometimes man gets it wrong because they have ulterior motives...such as when they use fear tactics to keep a congregation under their control. They may deliberately invent doctrines that are completely unfounded on scripture (such as hellfire) and they will have 2 or 3 verses which 'appear' to fit what they are saying but they have generally taken the verses out of context....or applied a literal meaning to something which is obviously symbolic.
futurezambian
New Member
I agree with the fact that only the Holy Spirit can reveal the true meaning. When we decide the meaning of a passage based on our own thoughts it is influenced by our background and opinion and is inherently flawed by our human nature. It is only through the leading of the Holy Spirit that we can put aside our own conclusions and read the Bible for what it says and not what we think it says.