The Bible - should we take it literally?

DivinePonytail

Hi guys,

When you read the bible, do you take all of the accounts as literal?
Or only some of it, and which one?

sparrow

[size=-1]

Originally posted by DivinePonytail at 27-7-2006 09:20 AM
Hi guys,

When you read the bible, do you take all of the accounts as literal?
Or only some of it, and which one?

Hi DVP.. Well, if you ask me, i'd say this: yes.. you should take it literally... but it depends how deep you want to go into the Word of God. As you go on and mature in it, you should also go beyond the literal meaning. Personally i believe this.. that almost every word has its meaning. (well, at leastof the Greek version, and the early english translations.. )

Personally, if you ask me, this is what i find about the Bible: the Bible, is a book with many many layers. On the surface, most of it can be taken literally.Read it at a surface value, and you will get a description of an event, or an instruction, or a vision.. etc. Peel deeper into the layers.. and there are still other things to be learnt, apart from that literal description. (A good description, is in the post by casejulia: take the Gospels lliterally.. you'll only see what Jesus did and said on earth. Go deeper into it, pay close attention to what is said in each book.. and you will see Christ the King, Christ the Servant, Christ the Perfect Man, and Christ the LORD.

An old Christian once said this about the Gospels: They are so simple that even a child can understand. And yet at the same time, when you read it again when you are, say, sixty, there are still things to be learnt from the Gospels.That is how rich the Word of God is.

Well.. about prophetic books (eg: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel.. etc) and parables, though.. it may be slightly different. Now, this is not to say that it cannot be read literally though. But prophecies are so deep and complex, that you'll never understand the true meaning of the underlying scriptures by just reading it literally. Put it simply, you can take it literally..and it will describe to you the vision that the prophets saw. But in order to understand what it all means, you need to go and see the prophecies behind them.

Same thing with Jesus's parables. But always notice that Jesus's parables make use of the word "like". The kingdom of God is like a mustard seed.. Pay close attention to words.. and it will make even more sense...

Why do i say so? Well, why do you think God inspired the writers to write the Old Testament in Hebrew and the New Testament in Greek (even though Jesus and His disciples don't spreak Greek.. they speak Aramaic)? According to linguists, Hebrew is a very pictorial language. And the purpose of the OT is to give a picture of what happend in the past, and how it foretells the coming of Christ. So God gave His Word in pictures.
And the New Testament -  most of the New Testament is to tell us of Christ, and of how we should be living as a follower of Christ. And Greek is a very complex language. It has different words for almost every different usage and context. And thus, i believe that every word has its meaning.. (and reading it, i do find it this way).
I believe, God means each and every word of it, even in the literal sense.. and the Greek language allows for this.

But i have to admit: some newer translations, although it preserves the surface meaning of the scriptures, some of them has lost certain deeper meanings..

Hm.. i'm just wondering: are there any portions that you have problems taking them literally? Want to talk about it here?
But don't worry. It's normal. I used to have that problem too. But doing this may help: read it with an open mind. And when you have doubts, talk to God about it. Evrytime you don't understand a passage, just ask God right out. God, what is it that You are saying???? lol.. I've done it many times.. it  really helps. That's the joy of reading the Bible. God helps you through it.

p/s: ugh.. i have a serious problem here. i can't seem to keep my posts short and sweet. HELP!!!

[ Last edited by  sparrow at 27-7-2006 10:41 AM ]

DivinePonytail

Thank sparrow.

Okay lets talk about Genesis, or the first 11 chapters which  I "personally" think are written in an allegorical style. Well none of them tie up with what we know now about earth science, physics and astronomy etc. I believe the only literal parts of Genesis is  that God created everything in existence at the dawn of time, and that it was "indeed very good."

However literal or allegory, does not reduces the Truth that the Creation account contains. The points of the story are that of God as Creator, the fundamental goodness of the Universe, the sanctity of human life and the holiness of the Sabbath.

sparrow

[size=-1]Genesis.. i hv thought about that before too, and i have a few "opinions" about how Genesis relates to science. But yeah, they are only opinions.. so i won't put them all here now.

i think i know where you are coming from. the word "days" or "years" - does it refer to a 24-hour-day? and a year, a 365-day-year?
hm.. maybe, but maybe not too. (After all, to God.. a day is like a thousand years..)

personally, my opinion is this: the word "day" in Genesis 1 is defined by an evening and a morning.  And God lets the sun and moon to govern the day and the night. So, i think it should not run too far from our present 24 hours.
About years, though.. no where in the Bible said, it is a 365-day-year. It could very well be longer, or shorter than what we have now.. since a year is probably "measured" very differently during that time.. (But that doesn't mean, the word "year" is not taken literally...

but yeah, there are other things too.. earth science.. archaelogy.. fossils and dinos.. Noah's flood.. *grins* - things that God has not told us.

Well, i'd like to hear more about what you think too. i believe there are things that God has not told us about, so it will always remain a mystery. Talking about it and hearing each other's opinions may help us learn a thing or two more..

as much as i talk, and post.. i'd like to listen and read too, you know.. so do go on..

[ Last edited by  sparrow at 27-7-2006 02:25 PM ]

DivinePonytail

Well, for me, science and religion should co-exist.  Example, the universe can be explained, the atoms and gravity etc by scientific means. However  the The Big Bang Theory as we know it was not a cosmic explosion at a point in time in empty black space, but the beginning of space and of time itself. Confusing eh

sparrow

[size=-1]

Originally posted by DivinePonytail at 27-7-2006 04:07 PM
Well, for me, science and religion should co-exist.  Example, the universe can be explained, the atoms and gravity etc by scientific means. However  the The Big Bang Theory as we know it was no ...

This is going to be an interesting topic. i had explored this topic with a friend before actually.. You wanna hear our views?

Well, DVP, as far as i believe, it should co-exist. But then, i believe this: there are certain things of God - which are beyond time and space.. and this may not be "measurable" by science.

About the BB, actually.. i do agree with you, but to a certain extent. The Big Bang happens at the point of Genesis 1:1. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. I believe, "the beginning" refers to the beginning of 'time and space' And time and space only started when God created the heavens and the earth.
(so what's before the BB? well, i believe, 'time and space' does not apply to God. God was from eternity.. and He did not have a beginning. So time and space did not exist before that. (but that doesn't mean God wasn't there.. it's just that, that "period" or whatever you call it.. is just "unseen", "undefinable" and "unmeasureable" by science.. because it's beyond time and space...

wondering what the others think...

casejulia

Originally posted by DivinePonytail at 27-7-2006 16:07

If we take the words in Genesis literally, yes God created the world in six days. Is it possible?
.....

2 Peter 3:8
"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day"

so what i think here is, the world was created for 6 thousand days

For God everything is possible

sparrow

[size=-1]You know, there are a couple of opinions regarding the 6 days:

1) the 6 days - are not literally 24-hour days. Like the Bible says, a day is like a thousand years. In other words, the 6 days, are probably thousands or millions of years. I have a friend (and a Christian too!), who loves this theory. It allows him to put Darwin into creation as well. (tho i beg to differ.. I'm ok with the millions of years.. but i do disagree on the fact that Adam came from apes..  )
But whether Darwinian or not.. this theory would allow for the scientific evidence.. the fossils and stuff. Dinos probably lived in the days between the creation of the animals and the creation of man.
But then again, i hv certain doubts about this theory.. this theory would mean that thousands of creatures (eg: dinos) lived and died before Adam and Eve sinned. Hmm.. i thought in the Garden of Eden, there is no death, and no suffering?

2) Or, the 6 days of creation in Genesis 1 - is not at the dawn of time, but much later.
Theres this theory that there could be a period of time  between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. And something probably happened there, that God did not tell us, which would account for the missing hole in our creation.
In other words,this is probably what could have happened: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.. God probably created an earth, with creatures (probably dinos lived there),and something happened and the earth became formless and empty (as stated in Gen 1:2)
Then God started a new creation (this is the one we are living in) and this is described in the 6 days in Genesis 1. (sounds heretic huh? but God never said He only created one earth.. did He?)
If this is true, then it allows for the time of the fall of Lucifer. And if there was indeed a time gap between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2, that "something" that happened could very well be this.
Lucifer was an angel of light.. who rebelled against God and was thrown out of heaven.. and he's known as the Devil now.. Well, if this account is true, then it must have  happened somewhere between the beginning of time and the time where Satan tempted Eve..

Personally, i feel that (2) is closer to the Bible. It allows for a perfect Garden of Eden before Adam and Eve sinned.. free of death, even of animals. And at the same time, it allows for the dinos, the fossils and everything else to be accounted for.. The fossils and stuff could be the remains of what was on this earth previously..

Hoping to hear what you guys think too.. Don't worry.. feel free to share.. i'm a pretty open minded Christian...


[ Last edited by  sparrow at 27-7-2006 06:22 PM ]

casejulia

Originally posted by sparrow at 27-7-2006 17:42

so what's before the BB? well, i believe, 'time and space' does not apply to God. God was from eternity.. and He did not have a beginning. So time and space did not exist before that...

[size=-1]Before the BB? there was Alpha - the beginning of a series or sequence! God is the begining of time.

Revelation 22:13
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

sparrow

Originally posted by casejulia at 27-7-2006 06:16 PM


Before the BB? there was Alpha - the beginning of a series or sequence! God is the begining of time.

Revelation 22:13
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and ...

well, i was just trying to differentiate "time and space" in God's perspective and science's perspective. What i'm trying to say is that, God's "Beginning", and creation's beginning, is not the same. God IS the beginning.. In other words, He did not come into existence only when He created the heavens and the earth.. He is eternal, which is even before creation.. (and time and space cannot be measured by science before creation..)

pfffthb.. lol.. Not sure if you grasp what i'm talking about though... lol...

casejulia

Originally posted by sparrow at 27-7-2006 18:02
...If this is true, then it allows for the time of the fall of Lucifer. And if there was indeed a time gap between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2, that "something" that happened could very well be this.
Lucifer was an angel of light.. who rebelled against God and was thrown out of heaven.. and he's known as the Devil now.. Well, if this account is true, then it must have  happened somewhere between the beginning of time and the time where Satan tempted Eve...

This link answer our question
http://users.aristotle.net/~bhuie/satan.htm

eastrun

Originally posted by casejulia at 27-7-2006 06:16 PM


Before the BB? there was Alpha - the beginning of a series or sequence! God is the begining of time.

Revelation 22:13
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and ...

Answer me..who is the Alpha and Omega..from my view..not Jesus, but God...Sparrow and I argue about this..But I said it is God, not Jesus that you all assumed as God...see Revelation 1:1

chocoholic

Originally posted by eastrun at 30-7-2006 10:15 AM



Answer me..who is the Alpha and Omega..from my view..not Jesus, but God...Sparrow and I argue about this..But I said it is God, not Jesus that you all assumed as God...see Revelation 1:1

Maybe this can help answer your question:
http://www.whatsaiththescripture ... .Revelations.1.html

sparrow

Originally posted by chocoholic at 30-7-2006 03:29 PM
Maybe this can help answer your question:
http://www.whatsaiththescripture ... .Revelations.1.html

Thanks chocoholic.

But i'm actually very amazed at how the thread could jump from Genesis to Revelation in such a short time. What happened to all the books in between?
And hmm.. we were just talking about the creation of the world.. and now, it's suddenly the end of the world?...hm.. time flies huh...


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

hahaha...

shalom

The Bible: Myth or History?


Sal: Chris, I've got to ask you something personal.

Chris: Go ahead, Sal: We're friends, aren't we?

Sal: How do you know so much about God? Are you a theological brain?

Chris: No, not at all. I'm just an ordinary person.

Sal:You must have taken some high level religion courses somewhere.

Chris: No . . .

Sal: Then you must have read hundreds of books.

Chris: No, Sal. Actually, what I know about God for sure comes from just one book. In fact, what the whole human race knows about God for sure, and not just as a matter of speculation and guesswork, comes from just one book.

Sal: The Bible, you mean?

Chris: Yes.

Sal: You really believe that one book gives you all the facts about God?

Chris: All the facts? Of course not. How could we ever have all the facts about the Infinite One? None of us can have complete knowledge of God, any more than a clam could have complete knowledge of us. Less so, in fact, because the difference between us and clams is only finite, but the difference between us and God is infinite.

Sal: Some facts, then?

Chris: Yes, what he told us.

Sal: So you think you've got some hard facts there in the Bible, eh?

Chris: I don't know what you mean by "hard facts".

Sal: Like the stuff science gives us.

Chris: No. Science measures things. We can't measure God.

Sal: So it's just myth, then.

Chris: No, it's truth.

Sal: You mean you really think God sits up there in the sky on a golden throne and has a strong right hand, and gets angry?

Chris: No. That's poetic language. But you can tell the truth in poetic language, you know. God really is exalted梩hough not physically, in space, in the sky. God really does rule the universe, though not from a physical golden throne. God really does have all power, though he doesn't have the same kind of strength as Muhammad Ali had in his right hand. And God really does want us to do good and not evil, though he doesn't get hysterical and red in the face.

Sal: So it's just symbolism.

Chris: But true symbolism. Not just a made-up story, like Santa Claus.

Sal: So you admit the whole Bible is poetic symbolism, not literal history.

Chris: No, I didn't say that. I said that the language it uses to describe God has to be symbolic. God can't be described literally because we can't see him. He doesn't have a physical body. But there are a lot of things in the Bible that are described literally -things we can see.

Sal: How can you tell what parts of the Bible to interpret symbolically and what parts to interpret literally? Isn't it just your personal preference?



for more, clik

http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/bible_myth-history.htm


happy reading :love:

sparrow

Originally posted by casejulia at 27-7-2006 08:12 PM
This link answer our question
http://users.aristotle.net/~bhuie/satan.htm

Interesting link. Need to sort out some thoughts and verses study Isaiah abit more before i go further..
But just one question here: to all of you who believe that the 6 days are actually 6 thousand (or even 6 million years).. do you think that the creation was pure then? (i mean, i know that spiritually, it was pure, and there was no sin. But what about physically?) Do creatures (the birds, the fish, the animals) reproduce and die back then? Or is it physically pure too?
i dunno.. i just find it abit difficult to accept that there was death in the Garden of Eden..  

nope.. this is not meant to be an argument.. i'm just exploring the possibility here.. (no point arguing, cos it's already in the past - and i think it is not meant to matter so much, cos it is not through creation that we are saved.. it doesn't change our salvation any bit.. hehee.. but still.. i'm just curious to know what you guys think... )

casejulia

last monday i passed by a christian book shop, i saw a sticker on the door

The Big Bang Theory: Jesus spoke than BANG its  happened :bgrin:

sparrow

Originally posted by casejulia at 11-8-2006 10:01 PM
last monday i passed by a christian book shop, i saw a sticker on the door

The Big Bang Theory: Jesus spoke than BANG its  happened :bgrin:

Yeah, that's something which i believe how the Big Bang happened too...

eastrun

Originally posted by sparrow at 15-8-2006 12:33 AM

Yeah, that's something which i believe how the Big Bang happened too...

BIG BANG not only mentioned in the Bible, but also in the Holy Quran. In fact, the BIG BANG theory mentioned in Hindu scripture. Meaning that, all books came from same source, but as the time goes by...new laws sent down and changes brought by a new prophet...

SquiZZ

Originally posted by eastrun at 27-8-2006 10:24 AM

BIG BANG not only mentioned in the Bible, but also in the Holy Quran. In fact, the BIG BANG theory mentioned in Hindu scripture. Meaning that, all books came from same source, but as the time goe ...

Joseph Smith created a new religion after islam which nowadays are called the mormons. So are we to accept this new religion as an update for the previous one?  Do you know the mormons eastrun?