Should the Bible be taken literally?

[Samuel Cripps]

Are you a jester? Pulling my leg, are ya?

What is God's definition of 'dragon'?

OK. I have no idea what Satan looks like. In Genesis he is referenced with the beasts of the field and made to crawl on his belly. Since he wasn't a man, I accept that he is a beast of the field. Beasts of the field were made on the same day as man. If God calls him a dragon who am I to argue with God? He may not be the same dragon you picture, but do you prefer your definitions over God's?

[rejoice44]

So what is a spiritual scale?

I guess it would equate to the stones crying out.

[Samuel Cripps]

Huh? Can you attempt to make a bit more sense?

I guess it would equate to the stones crying out.

[rejoice44]

Are you a jester? Pulling my leg, are ya?

You have already demonstrated that you don't believe the words of Jesus, and where does it end?

What is God's definition of 'dragon'?

[/QUOTE]

Satan

[Samuel Cripps]

I think we're done here.

Troll on.

You have already demonstrated that you don't believe the words of Jesus, and where does it end?

[Neanias]

The Bible is not open for our interpretation. It should be taught by the Spirit, and understood according to the Spirit's teaching.

[awestruckchild]

I still don't understand why it seems so hard to understand that the miracles literally happened and that also, the words are spirit.

Jesus said, the words I give you, they are spirit and truth.
He uncovered things hidden since the foundation of the world.
We are not to literally murder any man.
The SPIRIT of the words which He uncovered for us, is that even anger in our heart is murder.

The reason why it is the spirit of the words which avails us, can be seen by this above example. It is impossible to murder a man unless we have ALREADY murdered him in our heart. So the root of the problem is inside of us. If the inside of our cup is clean, the outside just will be also! If we don't murder a man in our heart, there will be no danger of us murdering him literally.

Jesus said, it is what proceeds from OUT of the man himself that defiles him.
As a man thinks in his heart, so is he.

We get caught up in putting a bandaid over a mortal wound. It doesn't work. A bandaid can't do a thing for a mortal, festering wound. Focusing on the outside of our cup is cosmetic surgery that attempts to make us look clean when just under the surface, there is festering pus.

So there is a literal don't murder.
There is a spiritual don't murder.
The letter kills.
The Spirit gives life.
This does not mean that we may literally murder a man or that God does not intend that we take this law literally and seriously. It is the SPIRIT though that avails us, because it deals with the root of our problem.

It is possible for the outside of your cup to look very clean while inside, you are full of the vilest filth. But it is NOT possible for the inside to be clean, and the outside filthy.

[jeffweeder]

The Bible is not open for our interpretation. It should be taught by the Spirit, and understood according to the Spirit's teaching.

He who has an ear, let hm hear what the Spirit is saying.

[Old man]

You are equating not literal with not truthful and that is an incorrect comparison.

No I’m implying or equating the idea that when we say that what the Holy Spirit (who was sent by the Father and Jesus to guide us into truth) inspired and directed the writers of the scripture to write, is not what He meant (that He did not mean what he said), then we are actually accusing Him of perpetrating a deception (at the most) or being fallible (at the minimum), for making a mistake in that He goofed and told us something other than what He actually meant. I would think that the Holy Spirit has the capabilities to be able to accurately have what He truly meant written down for us. He is supposed be guiding us into truth not making us miss it.

The most obvious case of this is Christ's parables. I don't think anyone would argue that they contain truth, but no one interprets them literally.

This is not true. I think you misunderstand what is meant by taking scriptures literally. When dealing with portions of scripture such as parables and vision and the like we “read” them understanding what they are; parables, visions, etc.

par•a•ble [par-uh-buhl] noun

• i. A short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.
• ii. A statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like.

We then interpret them literally

in•ter•pret [in-tur-prit] verb (used with object)

• i. To give or provide the meaning of; explain; explicate; elucidate.
• ii. To construe or understand in a particular way.

We start with the understanding that this is literally a parable and should not be taken otherwise. No one is saying that a parable (i.e. a short allegorical story…) is not a parable. The parable is a story that Christ literally told to a literal group either to convey a literal truth or to hide a literal truth. The parable was told within a specific context so it is within that context that we begin to interpret it. The parable although an allegory has a literal meaning and a literal application. When Jesus explained the parable of the sower and the seeds to the disciples He was explaining the literal interpretation of that parable or allegorical story.

A big problem lies in the fact that there are many who think that since a parable is allegorical that its interpretation can be stretched to include doctrines or ideas outside its context, or that it could refer to and apply to a wide variety of issues or doctrines not necessarily associated with the original context.

[glad4mercy]

Are you a jester? Pulling my leg, are ya?

What is God's definition of 'dragon'?

1. Dragon is one of the many names or titles for satan, just as Lamb is one of the many names or titles of Jesus.

2. The book of Revelation is the only book of the New Testament in which satan is called a dragon. The book of Revelation is an apocalypse, and uses symbols to represent literal realities.

3. I am in full agreement with Old Man's definition of literal in post 69, ( the last two paragraphs sum it up well) and that a literal interpretation of the Bible does indeed take parables, visions, apocalypses, and figures of speech into consideration when reading a text.

[rejoice44]

Every parable, allegory, metaphor, has an underlying literal truth that is the direct subject being spoken of.

The problem is that the enemies of the Bible want to declare it a work of fiction, that cannot be taken literally. They don't believe Jesus when he said the rocks would cry out, neither do they believe that Peter walked on water, or that the water was turned to wine.

If the Bible is not to be taken literally what is the alternative, that it is a work of fiction?

[TrustGzus]

For the context of the thread, what matters is how the rikus defines literal in the OP. The discussion isn't very useful if we have 12 people using 13 different uses of literal.

[Ceegen]

The bible is to be taken literal in that certain events are recorded "as is" and is not a story based on allegory, but a story that actually happened AND explains an allegory story. Things that happened in past times are a shadow of future events, which is why the saying goes, "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat its failures."

The failures of past generations, is rebellion to God. It's not different from today, or what will happen in future events. Thus, past events being a shadow of things to come, is prophecy. This is why Jesus tells us that the end times will be as in the days of Noah, eating, drinking and being merry, and not heeding the warnings of God that there's an impending flood that is ready to sweep you away to death.

Revelation 12:15 (KJV)
"And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood."

Literally, that makes no sense. Who is the serpent, and what comes out of his mouth? Satan, who lies. There's a flood of lies in the "last days", as in the days of noah, a flood of lies that fills the whole world! Prophecy based on actual events, so God can say "I warned you, and that is what I meant."

[MaryFreeman]

I chose "it is not so black and white" because there was no "yes AND no"

[Mark F]

As with any book we read, or conversation we engage in, we must process the words and decide if they say something literally and clearly as they are stated, or are there similies, puns, etc, being used. this comes from context and study.

From Hosea 12:10
10 I have also spoken by the prophets,
And have multiplied visions;
I have given symbols through the witness of the prophets.”

And Numbers 12:7-8a
7 Not so with My servant Moses;
He is faithful in all My house.

8 I speak with him face to face,
Even plainly, and not in dark sayings;
And he sees the form of the LORD.

I believe there to be more Scripture where God says He uses different language tools in Scripture, just cannot recall it at the moment.

Every passage must be interpreted and understood plainly.


1) Every passage has a primary basic interpretation.
2) From 1) there can be made many practical applications.
3) After 1 & 2 you can then determine a prophetic revelation.

The passage where Jesus said that if the people were made to be quiet, then the stones would cry out, I tend to take that as a matter of fact statement, I think the stones would have, the Lord of Glory was there!

Interpreting Scripture is like any communication we have normally.
If you were in your car with a friend and he got a phone call that his wife went into labor,
he then told you to put the hammer down and get me to the hospital would stare at him and say I don't have a hammer to put down and continue driving normally to your original destination, or would you interpret the metaphor he used to communicate to you to go fast to the hospital?

Just because it's the Bible do we loose our sense?