Does The Bible Need To Be Taken Literally Word For Word And Also Does It Need To Be Taken As Absolute Truth?
The Bible was written by men/humans who we all know we are liable to lie, exaggerate, invent, create and contrive stories. The Old testament was written at a time when before that for many centuries humans have made and worshipped all kinds of Gods to explain our being here, so it was no original idea by the time of the Old Testament of a God who ruled over man. IF the Old Testament had been the FIRST idea with claim of a God, it’s testament would stand stronger because the idea would have been original and then it wouldn’t have seem like somebody took one theory and then made it into another. But the fact is it wasn’t, it was an idea that tried and managed to rubbish all other previous similar ideas prior to that with the same initial idea of a God.
An example would be like an author who wrote a story about a little boy, dressed in blue who went to visit his granny, trekking through the woods met a grizzly bear who asked where he was going, the bear then proceeded toward the grannys house before the boy got there, ate the granny and dressed up in the grannys clothes to deceive the little boy whenever he would arrive. Then say, another author wrote a book quite similar only the boy was a girl, she was dressed in red and the grizzly bear was a wolf. I’m sure by now you see where I’m going with this, the ideas of the stories are similar but the problem is the second author couldn’t have come up with his story unless he was inspired by the previous authors ideas first, of course the story could change and take several u-turns but the same myth would still be there. Other stories can then be built around the second authors tale.
Also does every thing in the bible need to be taken literally? maybe I was educated badly in terms of religion, being born a catholic, in primary school we were taught that a lot of the stories in the bible like Adam and Even and Noahs Ark were all parables = stories with a moral meaning, that were not meant to be contrived as fact. So why do creationists and many Christians believe these to be actual accounts when we were taught otherwise?
As far as the New Testament goes it is my understanding that “Paul” was the first written account, but yet this wasn’t recorded until 30 to 40 years AFTER the supposed death of Jesus. That’s a long enough time for stories to change, if Jesus did exist how can you believe what is written down and what Jesus said is 100 percent accurate? Is it possible that these stories were invented, exaggerated or contrived? If Jesus did exist could he have been a David Blaine of his time? We’ve seen many magicians, illusionists, healers in ours, I mean it is possible. Inspiration can come from people who have the gift of persuasion, in opposite moral grounds Hitler managed to persuade his people into following his way of authority and the general German public bought it.
You can say it was prophesised in the Old Testament of Jesus coming, but how can it be prophecy when someone is acting out on something that was previously written down, this can easily just be acting on instruction.
After “Paul” did other people inspired by the story of Jesus start to add their own accounts in this continuation of his fact/fictional biography, inventing, exaggerating and contriving new tales? Again it’s plausible.
The bible was written in Greek and Hebrew, was there miscalculation in its translation? Morals passed off with misleading meaning? Even in its English form I have trouble interpreting Bible literature. Various Christian religions even have trouble coming to agreement with each other about many of the Bibles Teachings.
I don’t understand how Christians can take all of this as 100 percent accurate information when there is enough room for doubt about what is true and what is not true. Even historians can’t perceive 100 percent accuracy when studying the past as they can only take what information is given to them hoping that their conclusions is somewhat accurate although a lot of times, not entirely.
You can throw as many quotes from the bible at me referencing to prove me wrong and say it’s the word of God, but really it is NOT the word of God, it is mans supposed account of the word of God. God did not write the bible, neither did Jesus, men did, men as I already said who are liable to lie, exaggerate; contrive making the Bible plausible enough to not be true. God did not speak to YOU, he supposedly spoke to THEM, so you are left in a situation were you have to take THEIR word for granted, if you are happy to always rely on third party information as fact, well so be it.
From one story, inspiration can lead into creation of another story and what you are left with now is a Bible with many accounts of plausible lies, not trustworthy 100 percent accurate information, with stories so insane there is a helluva lot more reason to doubt rather than believe.
How Christians have a hard time understanding why atheists can lack or have little faith in believing the word of the bible is beyond me. When bibles terms come across like a con artist, have faith or be punished in the pits of hell, kind of seems like an immediate guilt trip forcing you into submission to believe everything it tries to preach.
I await to hear your answers and so I leave you with the words, “Do you always believe everything you read?”
Just to answer the title question, i think the bible is one long metaphor.
“………….does it need to be taken as absolute truth?”
Ive always taken it to be absolute bollocks!
seems to me you wrote a blog and not a question.
Way way too long to read all that. The bible IS taken from ORIGINAL text,so I don’t know where you got your information from. You should get the facts right before you ask stuff that you don’t even understand.
Not only have you never read the Bible, but nothing any of us say will change your mind, so I won’t waste my time convincing you.
But yes, the Bible is meant to be taken literally. Whatever school you went to wasn’t exactly up-and-up on the whole “religion” thing. All of the stories, except the ones that are actually listed as parables, are to be considered true.
Also, it has been proven by historians, even atheist ones, that the existence of Jesus is undoubtable. Only a moron would not believe it. The proof is just too overwhelming. Whether you believe Him to be the Son of God or not, well, that’s up to you.
And what is this whole”Paul” business? You do realize that there is no book called this, and that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all come before anything written by Paul? Do you know who Paul is, even? He is one of the main men responsible for strengthening the charter churches, so OF COURSE IT WILL BE AFTER JESUS’S DEATH! The death and ressurection of Jesus is what this whole faith is based upon.
What a badly educated rant. Please come up with better material.
I believe that the Bible shouldn’t be taken word for word. If you read the Bible a lot you’ll notice many contradictions, like God says to do this, then forbids it. God didn’t write the Bible!!!!!!! (as soo many people like to claim). Humans wrote it and they can make mistakes, or lie, etc, etc. Some stories in the Old Testament can be looked at symbolically and then you can look at the true righteous meaning behind it. But the part of the Bible (Exodus I believe) when Moses and his people escaped from Egypt and were searching for the promised land; don’t believe it word for word. Because then Moses was like a leader, or politician. His main role was to make his people happy for 40 years of wandering; not write what is right. This can be backed up by reading Exodus, where there are many paradoxes and contradictions; probably to keep up with the mood of the people. I mean, why would an all-powerful/knowing God change his mind, when he can make a right decision once and for all? Also, it’s much easier to write what you want when you proclaim your going to burn in hell forever in you don’t believe your stories. The New Testament is more trustworthy, because stories start making more sense. And Jesus started going against the people to tell them the truth about God, unlike Moses, who’s followers apparently never disbelieved him. In this case, it’s easier to believe in lie.
My belief is that most stories in the Bible are symbolic and try to relay a hidden message to you. While the direct commands given by Moses can be disregarded (not all of them), because Moses is obviously lying, saying one thing and then changing it, God wouldn’t change his mind so to not confuse his people. If you want to read some more info about symbolism in stories then go to http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;…
and search for my answer (it’s the longest one). You’ll know why I didn’t want to post it once you read it.
P.S. I’m happy some people are as critical of the world as me.
I’m not going to read that whole thing and I’m sure you put a lot of thought into it, but the bible needs to be taken as a story. A good story that was written by man for the purpose of controlling the masses. But it is a good story. I enjoy reading it, through Atheist eyes.
Crap, do you really think anyone is going to read all of that? NO, never take the bible literally. It’s just a book of fables.
Taking the Bible literally leads to clear contradictions, absurdities an falsehoods. It is impossible to get a coherent message out of that bundle of mythology.
If the Bible was taken word for word, the Christians would greet everyone at church with a kiss, called a holy kiss, which was the practice then.
Of course not.
The bible is to be taken literally where the Holy Spirit tells us and it indicates and not literal where the Holy Spirit tells us and it indicates.
The bible was written by men who God told them what to write. They did not write it for their own pleasure. Your assumption that they lied is absolutely false.
Everything else is just a rant about nonsense. The bible proves it is God’s word.
Again, there is a literal and there is a Spiritual literal, the latter of which understanding of the scriptures fall under. As the book testifies of it self, the actual author is the Holy Spirit speaking through men to write, for it is written that holy men of old wrote as they were moved upon by the Spirit. For this reason Jesus promised the church the Comforter after He ascended, telling them the Spirit would lead/teach them in all paths of truth and righteousness. By leadership of the Spirit, that which is Spiritually written may be discerned. The scriptures were not written to or for the lost/unsaved but indeed for the saved. Even the saved, not seeking the guidance of the Spirit cannot do much in the way of discernment, and to the lost there can only be confusion. For instance the difference in two small words can be the difference is heaven and hell. John 3:16 states if one believes “in” Christ, one should/could be saved. However James wrote that the devils believe in Christ, and tremble, but it does not save them. Believing in is just acceptance of existence. But John 3:18 states that those who believe “ON” His name shall not come into condemnation.
God’s word is true in it’s entirity. I have often found that any error perceived was from the source of the perceiver.
i agree with you on just about all of your points.
but personally, i think there is no way to take the bible other than literally (except, for example, jesus’ parables or other allegorical stories meant to convey a moral as told by a chacter in the bible). i don’t understand how someone can choose which parts of the bible to take as literal fact and which parts are metaphorical. if you (not you specifically, just in general) think the creation story is meant to be a metaphor because it’s inconsistent with what we know about science, how can you be sure that jesus’ miracles or any other fantastical occurance in the bible isn’t meant to be a metaphor as well? how can you be sure god and jesus themselves aren’t metaphors?
continuining in that vein of thought, do you think that people in earlier periods of history thought the bible was metaphorical at all? or do you think that we only think it’s metaphorical now because we know more about the way the universe works and we know it is inconsistent with what the bible tells us.
i’ve also often wondered if some of the stories of jesus’ miracles are exaggerated accounts of an ancient, innovative illusionist. walking on water could probably work if you managed to set up some kind of table-like structure just below the surface of the water the night before. i think joseph smith unsuccessfully attempted to do the same thing. penn and teller demonstrated how someone could perform the illusion of making someone believe you turned water into wine. and sometimes i wonder if other stories about jesus are just exaggerations of an actual event that grew out of proportion or tall tales that people now take as literal truth.