Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
From another thread:
Where?
-
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!
Does the Bible Promote Literalism?
- Thread starter Storm
- Start date
Zorro1227
Active Member
I could easily write a book and tell people that my writings are inspired by god, but that does not make it true.
Just_me_Mike
Well-Known Member
Storm, I think the concepts are to be taken literal, if that makes sense.
For example, the world will end, howevr, exactly what is going to happen just isn't available with certainty.
It is matter of fact about Jesus rising from the dead accordig to the bible.
Also the bible says that Jesus spoke with a parable and without a parable he did not speak. So what is a parable? I think it is defined as an earthly story with a spiritual meaning.
Which is why I think the way I do, because it is not as cut and dry as saying it is all literal or not.
Hope I made some sense.
For example, the world will end, howevr, exactly what is going to happen just isn't available with certainty.
It is matter of fact about Jesus rising from the dead accordig to the bible.
Also the bible says that Jesus spoke with a parable and without a parable he did not speak. So what is a parable? I think it is defined as an earthly story with a spiritual meaning.
Which is why I think the way I do, because it is not as cut and dry as saying it is all literal or not.
Hope I made some sense.
Do any of the books (of the Bible) tell us how we're supposed to read the rest of the books?
I don't know enough to be able to give a definite answer to the OP, but I do know that most of the early church fathers---including Paul---read their scriptures allegorically.
The idea that any of the modern apologists, the literalists, would have a better handle on the purpose or meaning of scripture than Justyn Martyre, Origen, Augustine, ect., is laughable.
I don't know enough to be able to give a definite answer to the OP, but I do know that most of the early church fathers---including Paul---read their scriptures allegorically.
The idea that any of the modern apologists, the literalists, would have a better handle on the purpose or meaning of scripture than Justyn Martyre, Origen, Augustine, ect., is laughable.
There are a fair number of spots in the New Testament that introduce new interpretations for parts of the Old Testament.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Such as? I mean, is there a verse that says "none of this is metaphor?"
Yes. Such as Paul in Corinthians when he says that the story of Hagar and Ismael is meant to be read as an allegory (I'll see if I can find that).
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Doesn't really bolster the argument that the Bible says Literalism is the way, does it?
Oh... nothing like that. It's more like they said "these OT verses are prophesy" or "these OT verse prophesize Jesus", or "there is a link between Adam and Jesus".
The closest you'll probably get to what you're after is 2 Timothy 3:16:
But even that's a fair cry from what you're asking for.
My bad, it was Gallations;
Gal 4:22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
Not if you follow Paul, as most literalists claim to.
Gal 4:22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
Not if you follow Paul, as most literalists claim to.
Whole sections of the Bible are literally poetry. The claim is nonsense.
That's the verse literalists usually try to use to justify their approach. Weak as it is I'm guessing there isn't anything more to the point anywhere in the Bible. Otherwise they would have found it.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Thought so, but since I've never even read the whole thing, I thought I'd give him a chance. Funny how he hasn't shown his face.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
This makes it even more puzzling why so many who claim to read the bible, also take it literally.