Is the Bible Allegorical or Literal?

[Kenny]

Another question disputed for ages causing Christian unity to be split into thousands of sects over interpretations of the Bible.

Some examples - you may wish to add more.

The seven days of creation - allegorical or literal truth?
Science has proven the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

Adam and Eve - Allegorical or literal?

The Second Coming - Riding on a cloud with angels - literal or allegorical?

Christ said ‘let the dead bury the dead - literal or allegorical? (Luke 9:60)

Depends on which part.

 

[loverofhumanity]

It is not that much of a big deal amongst Christians, or it shouldn't be.
The problems get bigger when heretical sects, calling themselves Christians, start spouting their beliefs about allegory and literal parts as if they are Christian beliefs, and when false prophets do a similar thing. All this just adds to any minor confusions that Christians have among themselves, so in the end people scratch their collective head and throw their arms up and say people can understand the Bible any way we like and there aren't any rules to interpretation.

Unfortunately there is no agreement on one correct interpretation among Christians so people do not know which sect to follow.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

That sounds rather evil. Such an important idea should not be limited by accidents of birth.

Yes, I understand that.
But the God of Bible says, I am God, it is upto Me how much I give to everyone. That is the story of the vineyard, that to some He gives more to some less. Seems unfair though.

 

[Brian2]

Unfortunately there is no agreement on one correct interpretation among Christians so people do not know which sect to follow.

In the parable of the weeds sown among the good seed the owner of the field said that an enemy had planted the weeds and to leave them till the harvest and then gather the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned and collect the wheat into his barn.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I think you pose something of a false binary choice here. The bible is a literary work and as such contains all manner of literary and rhetorical usages and devices within it. "Let the dead bury the dead" is not allegorical. It is obvious hyperbole, though. There are many more examples of rhetorical hyperbole in the reported words of Christ and others. There is also metaphor, poetry, allegory and myth (e.g. the Exodus story, which archaeology tells us almost certainly didn't happen, or not in the way it is portrayed and the story of the Flood, which is an ancient Fertile Crescent legend.)

This is not surprising in a work compiled long ago, from many authors, over many centuries. What Christians believe is that these authors had divine inspiration and that, between them, they are one means (not, please note, necessarily the only one) by which God conveys His message to his people. (In point of fact, it was clearly not sufficient, or the Word would not have been made flesh and would not have dwelt among us.) Opinions differ between religious denominations as to how perfectly or imperfectly it achieves this. Most mainstream Christians recognise it is not always clear and has to be read as a whole, and the various internal contradictions intelligently reconciled, in order to discern what some passages should be taken to mean. Sometimes, as with other literature, there is no unique interpretation and there are different schools of thought, i.e. passages can have multiple meanings, perhaps intentionally.

I'll leave you with some thoughts of the current pope on the issue of the bible and the Word of God:


"Sacred Scripture is the written testimony of the divine Word, the canonical memory that attests to the event of Revelation. However, the Word of God precedes the Bible and surpasses it. That is why the centre of our faith isn't just a book, but a salvation history and above all a person, Jesus Christ, the Word of God made flesh.

The relationship between Christ, the Word Made Flesh, and the Scriptures, the written Word of God, lies at the heart of what the Church calls Sacred Tradition:


It is precisely because the Word of God embraces and extends beyond Scripture that, in order to properly understand it, the Holy Spirit's constant presence, who guides us "to all truth," is necessary. It is necessary to place ourselves within the great Tradition that has, with the Holy Spirit's assistance and the Magisterium's guidance, recognized the canonical writings as the Word that God addresses to his people, who have never ceased meditating upon it and discovering inexhaustible riches from it.

The Bible is a form of God's revelation to man, but the most complete form of that revelation is found in the person of Jesus Christ. The Scriptures arose out of the life of the Church—that is, out of the life of those believers who encountered Christ, both personally and through their fellow believers. They were written within the context of that relationship with Christ, and the selection of the canon—of the books that would become the Bible—occurred within that context. But even after the canon of Scripture is determined, Scripture remains only a portion of the Word of God, because the fullness of the Word is found in the life of the Church and her relationship to Christ........

Taken from: Pope Francis Says the Word of God Precedes the Bible

That seems fairly reasonable to me.

My own belief is that the interpretation of the Bible was always meant to unite and be a cause of love and fellowship but that divisions have come about through too much emphasis on theology and leadership instead of the love and harmony which Jesus taught.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I think Bible should be understood as it is written. It explains itself what it means. If something is allegorical, it is shown in the text.

If it was that easy then Christianity would be one religion but it is divided into conflicting sects over the meaning of the Bible. Which sect has the correct interpretation? I believe in the Bible but do not accept the divisive interpretations.

I believe there to be an interpretation which can bring the world together.

 

[CG Didymus]

My own belief is that the interpretation of the Bible was always meant to unite and be a cause of love and fellowship but that divisions have come about through too much emphasis on theology and leadership instead of the love and harmony which Jesus taught.

Again, God told his people to kill all the people in Jericho. And God had Elijah kill all the prophets of Baal. And even in the NT, Christianity believed the religions of other people, like the Greeks and Romans, were false.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I tend to believe that there is a combination of both. Jesus often spoke in parables, since this was an easier way to create understanding in common people.

Mathew 13:31-32
He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.”

The Kingdom of God is not tiny like a mustard seed. But this parable shows something that seems to start small, and not too impressive, becoming the larger than the rest in the garden of knowledge.

As far as the age of the universe, the science estimate of 13 billion years is based on earth time, which is used for practical convenience. This is a parable, since earth time is not the universal standard of time, due to the earth being the center of the universe. Aliens, if they exist, may not use earth time as the universal standard.

The Earth was not even around for the first 7-8 billion years of the universe, to be a valid universal standard for all time, since the BB. In terms of Genesis, it is not clear what time reference the writer of Genesis was using. But it was not earth time. He never said earth days, which would have been false, since this is not the universal standard, like the science parable; mustard time seed.

If we apply Einstein's theory of relativity; relative reference, to the 13 billion earth year parable, we would need to be in a reference very close to the speed of light, for those13 billion earth years to time dilate into one day. At the speed of light, time stops.

In Genesis, God says let there be called light! Light travels at the speed of light, which is needed to make the Genesis claim of one day to form the universe valid; God reference was very close to the speed of light.. How would the ancients stumble onto this modern reference time conversion, that is also consistent with God and the light claim; speed of light? Is it coincidence or inspired?

In terms of the science parable, of earth time being universal, and the earth reference for telescopes the center of the universe, each day of creation takes less and less earth years. Life only takes about a billion years. The sequence of diminishing time, would suggest God was slowing his reference from the speed of light; let there be light, to less and less than the speed of light, until God becomes man; Jesus. Then God and earth time references match. Although some miracles, which speed up healing, may have been time dilated; time potential added.

I would be more comfortable if science would use actual space-time references, for the formation of the universe, instead of dumb it down with universal earth time, even if this is a useful parable.

How do we know by days was meant earth days and not divine days as in a thousand years for a day? Does not Christ’s appearance represent a ‘Day of God? The Bible to me is a heavenly Book speaking about spiritual happenings.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I believe literal.

I believe part fact and part fantasy.

I believe allegorical. The dead can't bury anyone so the meaning of dead here does not refer to physical death but is an allegory for spiritual death.

But how does one know when to apply a literal interpretation and when to apply a spiritual interpretation? How can one be positive they are using the correct method of the two?

 

[loverofhumanity]

All literal and Spiritual. You have no evidence the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, that’s hearsay, or that the distant sky at night is no more than an optical illusion set up by God, there’s no tangible evidence.

Heaven and Hell are the literal truth and exist but imho need interpreting.

So you don’t accept scientific evidence of the earth’s age? How old do you believe it is?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, I understand that.
But the God of Bible says, I am God, it is upto Me how much I give to everyone. That is the story of the vineyard, that to some He gives more to some less. Seems unfair though.

He seemed to have a good reason if I remember correctly. The late workers did as much work and got as much pay if I recall correctly. Your analogy fails due to that not being the case just because of where someone was born.


Back to the drawing board.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Doesn't Bahai present the same kind of questions? It seems to me that most revealed religions would.



In my opinion (which won't be shared by many Christians or Muslims) the early parts of Genesis are clearly myths. By 'myth' I mean stories that help people make sense of things. 'Myths' in this sense provide a broader plot narrative into which the events of life can be fitted to give them meaning.

I see the creation stories as intended to show that reality (as it was conceived then) was entirely the work of God, that it was purposeful, and perhaps to say something about the relative relationships of its parts.



'Proof' only applies in mathematics and logic. Science has discovered multiple sorts of evidence that the Earth may be approximately that old, but it's far from apodeictic proof.

Science can only make conclusions more likely, not logically necessary. I personally accept the 4.5 billion year age of the Earth as a rough working assumption, not as something that has to be true. It forms the foundation of my thinking about biological evolution, life's origins, planetology and things like that, but it might nevertheless be mistaken,

In that sense, I perceive science as playing a role very akin to ancient myth in our modern day and age: as a body of accepted stories that help us make sense of experience by giving individual events a broader interpretive context.

Yes the same here with regards to 4.5 billion years being just an approximate estimate.

As to Genesis being mythical though. I suggest another possible meaning.

As the Bible is concerned with spiritual matters, I believe the seven days of creation refer to divine days in which a major spiritual event occurs.

With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. (2 Peter 3:8)

So a Day of God is about 1,000 years. Now I believe just as in a normal day the sun rises and sets so too in the Day of God the Sun of Truth rises and sets. That is, a new Prophet, Teacher or Messenger is sent to guide men in each Day. So at one time it was the Day of Moses, at another the Day of Jesus and so on, altogether about Seven in this week or cycle of approximately 7,000 years.

I think They are Krishna, Moses, Buddha, Christ, Zoroaster, Muhammad and the Bab since Adam.

So the religious history of the last 7,000 years is contained in a few verses of Genesis. Nothing to do at all with the age of the earth but the age of this spiritual cycle. It is also known as the ‘Prophetic Cycle’ due to warnings and prophecies about the Last Day, the end of the cycle. And that a new cycle of fulfilment is beginning when all the promises made by God will gradually eventuate such as world peace etc.

As the Bible is mainly about spiritual events, this explanation makes far more sense to me than trying to Intrepid, it literally or just calling the Bible a myth. This way we can see it relates a profound truth that God sends many Messengers to humanity and history backs up Genesis here.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Hehe!

Christianity could have united humanity if it did not become divided itself.

 

[loverofhumanity]

we will find out soon enough

In reference to?

 

[loverofhumanity]

I think the Bible contains both; passages which are to be taken literally and those which are to be read allegorically.

I go by the old common sense golden rule of
interpretation, as follows:

When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.” –Dr. David L. Cooper (1886-1965),
founder of The Biblical Research Society



This has often been shortened to:
“When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense, lest it result in nonsense.”

I fully agree with you there. But when you get to things like Christ coming on a cloud with angels and trumpet it doesn’t sound like plain common words but more allegorical as He says He will come like a ‘thief in the night’ and who sees a thief in the night? Certainly not many indicating He will appear at night when people are spiritually asleep and not expecting Him so its possible then to easily miss Him.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Why should Prophets of God write an allegorical Book? That is the question.

To distinguish the sincere from the insincere.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I'll stick with those that you listed

The Hebrew word YOM could actually be translated as a period of time. There are Christians who will refute this - mainly to keep the teachings that's been passed down for centuries intact.

God himself is a scientist after all he created everything he said let there be light in the Big Bang occurred and it actually started with a burst of light. So God gave man a form of scientific knowledge for man to use but the Bible does say the things that are seen are not made of things which do appear - Hebrews 11:3

Adam and Eve _ even for any of the humanoids / hominoids there had to be a first male and a first female.

It didn't say he was riding on a cloud - it said he was coming with the clouds.
And what are those things flying around within the clouds
Obama on UFO videos: 'We don't know exactly what they are'

Opinion | Now that ‘60 Minutes’ has climbed aboard the UFO mother ship, it’s time for skeptics to eject

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/05/17/ufo-sightings-navy-ryan-graves/

UFOs regularly spotted in restricted U.S. airspace, report on the phenomena due next month

Let the unsaved bury the unsaved is what Christ meant.

Interesting about UFO’s but with todays cameras and digital photography I still can’t get that they can’t get a really clear close up or zoomed in photo of one. All the photos look photoshopped or so distant and grainy that it doesn’t reflect our modern photography technology at all.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Depends on which part.

Always happy to share understandings with my Christian brothers and sisters.

Suppose if one wrongfully interprets an allegorical as literal or literally when it should be allegorical one can be led astray but thinking one has the truth! So how does one ‘know’ their interpretation is the correct one?

 

[Augustus]

A pastor I knew some time ago used to quote a Native American (no idea who) in saying "This story never happened but it is true".

Can’t remember where, but have heard “Just because it didn’t happen, doesn’t mean it’s not true”

 

[exchemist]

My own belief is that the interpretation of the Bible was always meant to unite and be a cause of love and fellowship but that divisions have come about through too much emphasis on theology and leadership instead of the love and harmony which Jesus taught.

That may well be true. However it was actually you yourself that started this thread with a question intended to highlight differences.