Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Is The Bible Literally True?

  1. #1
    Department Head Apologiaphoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Corryton
    Faith
    Trinitarian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,448
    Amen (Given)
    286
    Amen (Received)
    2648

    Is The Bible Literally True?

    How should we read the accounts?

    The link can be found here.

    -----

    Should we take the Bible literally? Let's plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

    Someone sent me an article from the Huffington Post recently on if the Bible is literally true. The article is by a Steve McSwain who is described as a speaker, author, counselor to congregations, Ambassador to the Councilor on the Parliament for World's Religions, and Spiritual Teacher. No academic credentials are listed. He does also describe Christianity as his faith so he claims at some level to be a Christian.*

    He does say at the start that while he values the Bible, he doesn't believe it to be divinely dictated or a sacred text without error. I don't know any evangelical today who really holds to the dictation theory. No doubt, there are some in the rank and file who do, but not the majority.*

    He goes on to say that if you are a Biblical literalist, that this bothers you. You believe that everything must be literal and it must be error-free. At this, I have a problem. What is meant by literal? It's a term that's often used and yet few people really define it. Most people do not think Jesus is literally a door or a vine when He uses that language.*

    Sadly, McSwain is probably accurate when some people think that if they risk undermining the text or questioning it, they could undermine all of it. Everything goes out the window then. This is the all-or-nothing thinking that many Christians do have and amusingly, many skeptics have that as well. I recall one person on Unbelievable? asking a guest on the show that if the Bible doesn't agree with how Judas died, then how can we trust that Jesus was crucified?

    McSwain goes to the flood accounts and says that they obviously contradict. He points to the differences between verses 2 and 15 of chapter 7. Let's go and look at what they say.*

    Verse 2:*Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean*animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate

    Verse 15:*Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark.

    Look. I know that there are possible claims of contradictions and such, but this is not a good one. All that is said in verse 15 is pairs came. It doesn't specify how many and how many of each kind came. In that case, give the benefit of the doubt to the author instead.*

    He goes on to say that,

    The real Moses never wielded a staff with supernatural powers, the tip of which, when dipped into the Nile, turned the river into a cesspool of blood. Or, when dipped into the Red Sea, caused it to part so Israelites could pass to the other side on dry, not muddy, ground.

    None of these Biblical stories, including the ones where Jesus is depicted as defying the laws of nature and performing miracles... as in, walking on water or giving sight to the blind or, most amazingly, raising dead people back to life were recorded as factual, or literal, eyewitness accounts. And, even if they were, they cannot be depicted as such today, if you want any of it to be believed... to be respected... or, to be read with any seriousness.
    For the sake of argument, this could be true, but the problem is McSwain gives us no reason to believe any of this. I also have to wonder what kind of Christian he is if he denies any miracles at all. Again, McSwain's case could hypothetically be right, but he has given us no reason to think so, that is, unless you just come out and agree that miracles don't happen, but that is the very thing under question.

    As for the idea of eyewitness accounts, it would be nice to see some interaction with scholarship, such as Richard Bauckham, but we can suspect that won't happen. Statements of faith are problematic no matter who says it. Unfortunately, mayn people will read McSwain and believe it because, well he's in the Huffington Post, and do so without any real reason why they should believe it.

    What matters to McSwain is how the stories have shaped the lives of those who hear its message. This can sound good, but while it's great that people have their lives changed, do we want to enforce the Noble Lie? If Christianity is not true, then there is truly no resurrection, no heaven beyond this world, no hell to shun, no forgiveness of sins, no real love of God.*

    It's hard to believe that the early church was really excited about that.*

    McSwain has a watered down faith. Note I have not said he has to embrace inerrancy, but he seems to have just embraced that Christianity is all about being a good person and the truth of the Bible does not matter. If anything, the truth of the Bible matters abundantly. If it is true that God lived among us and that Jesus died and rose again and there is real forgiveness and a heaven to gain and a hell to avoid and eternal life in resurrected bodies, I should think we would want to know it. If it is not true, then who really cares? But if it is true, it matters greatly. As has been said, if Christianity is not true, it is of no importance. If it is true, it is of the utmost importance.

  2. Amen Jedidiah, LostSheep, Scrawly amen'd this post.
  3. #2
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    38,825
    Amen (Given)
    3600
    Amen (Received)
    18343
    I take the bible as literally true in the sense that the authors were accurately reporting events as they actually happened, as far as they understood them. That doesn't mean that everything they reported on was literal. They reported Jesus speaking figuratively, for example. Or they told stories of visions. Or they reported what the LORD said, but the LORD could be using figurative language too.

    The bible also contains books of poetry and songs and proverbs which are not literal.

  4. Amen Jedidiah, alaskazimm amen'd this post.
  5. #3
    Theologyweb's Official Grandfather Jedidiah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Peter's Creek, Alaska
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,625
    Amen (Given)
    19265
    Amen (Received)
    6212
    As a new Christian I was attending a liberal church, before I knew better. When I was leaving to move to a conservative Bible believing church the pastor told me that the Bible was much as you describe McSwain's opinion. The Bible is a human document as well as a divine one. At the time I had no response to that. Now I realize that just as Christ was human and divine, so is the Bible. I see it as literally true in much the same way that Sparko describes.
    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

  6. #4
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    12,458
    Amen (Given)
    5893
    Amen (Received)
    4576
    Yep, the literal parts are literally true. Only an idiot reads things that have metaphors, similes and figurative examples and thinks it's meant all to be taken literally.

  7. Amen Jedidiah amen'd this post.
  8. #5
    Professor KingsGambit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Next to you
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,954
    Amen (Given)
    1456
    Amen (Received)
    3863
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Yep, the literal parts are literally true. Only an idiot reads things that have metaphors, similes and figurative examples and thinks it's meant all to be taken literally.
    And the issue is determining what that is. One Catholic friend of mine just blogged on how he takes John 6:54 literally and that it's a salvation issue.
    For what was given to everyone for the use of all, you have taken for your exclusive use. The earth belongs not to the rich, but to everyone. - Ambrose, 4th century AD

    All cruelty springs from weakness. - Seneca the Younger

  9. Amen Teallaura amen'd this post.
  10. #6
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,096
    Amen (Given)
    1087
    Amen (Received)
    1178
    Quote Originally Posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
    How should we read the accounts?

    The link can be found here.

    -----

    Should we take the Bible literally? Let's plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

    Someone sent me an article from the Huffington Post recently on if the Bible is literally true. The article is by a Steve McSwain who is described as a speaker, author, counselor to congregations, Ambassador to the Councilor on the Parliament for World's Religions, and Spiritual Teacher. No academic credentials are listed. He does also describe Christianity as his faith so he claims at some level to be a Christian.*

    He does say at the start that while he values the Bible, he doesn't believe it to be divinely dictated or a sacred text without error. I don't know any evangelical today who really holds to the dictation theory. No doubt, there are some in the rank and file who do, but not the majority.*

    He goes on to say that if you are a Biblical literalist, that this bothers you. You believe that everything must be literal and it must be error-free. At this, I have a problem. What is meant by literal? It's a term that's often used and yet few people really define it. Most people do not think Jesus is literally a door or a vine when He uses that language.*

    Sadly, McSwain is probably accurate when some people think that if they risk undermining the text or questioning it, they could undermine all of it. Everything goes out the window then. This is the all-or-nothing thinking that many Christians do have and amusingly, many skeptics have that as well. I recall one person on Unbelievable? asking a guest on the show that if the Bible doesn't agree with how Judas died, then how can we trust that Jesus was crucified?

    McSwain goes to the flood accounts and says that they obviously contradict. He points to the differences between verses 2 and 15 of chapter 7. Let's go and look at what they say.*

    Verse 2:*Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean*animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate

    Verse 15:*Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark.

    Look. I know that there are possible claims of contradictions and such, but this is not a good one. All that is said in verse 15 is pairs came. It doesn't specify how many and how many of each kind came. In that case, give the benefit of the doubt to the author instead.*

    He goes on to say that,



    For the sake of argument, this could be true, but the problem is McSwain gives us no reason to believe any of this. I also have to wonder what kind of Christian he is if he denies any miracles at all. Again, McSwain's case could hypothetically be right, but he has given us no reason to think so, that is, unless you just come out and agree that miracles don't happen, but that is the very thing under question.

    As for the idea of eyewitness accounts, it would be nice to see some interaction with scholarship, such as Richard Bauckham, but we can suspect that won't happen. Statements of faith are problematic no matter who says it. Unfortunately, mayn people will read McSwain and believe it because, well he's in the Huffington Post, and do so without any real reason why they should believe it.

    What matters to McSwain is how the stories have shaped the lives of those who hear its message. This can sound good, but while it's great that people have their lives changed, do we want to enforce the Noble Lie? If Christianity is not true, then there is truly no resurrection, no heaven beyond this world, no hell to shun, no forgiveness of sins, no real love of God.*

    It's hard to believe that the early church was really excited about that.*

    McSwain has a watered down faith. Note I have not said he has to embrace inerrancy, but he seems to have just embraced that Christianity is all about being a good person and the truth of the Bible does not matter. If anything, the truth of the Bible matters abundantly. If it is true that God lived among us and that Jesus died and rose again and there is real forgiveness and a heaven to gain and a hell to avoid and eternal life in resurrected bodies, I should think we would want to know it. If it is not true, then who really cares? But if it is true, it matters greatly. As has been said, if Christianity is not true, it is of no importance. If it is true, it is of the utmost importance.
    For the most part, no it isn't literally true.

  11. #7
    tWebber 37818's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    So. California
    Faith
    Nontraditional Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,967
    Amen (Given)
    805
    Amen (Received)
    434
    Did Jesus really mean, ". . . For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. . . ." (Matthew 5:18). That the original Hebrew, the very letters of the Hebrew words.
    . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

  12. #8
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,557
    Amen (Given)
    874
    Amen (Received)
    15114
    Quote Originally Posted by KingsGambit View Post
    And the issue is determining what that is.
    That has caused problems in the past and to a lesser extent today as well.

    For instance, because Paul had declared that the entire world was hearing the gospel (Rom. 1:8; 10:18; 16:25-26; Col. 1:6, 23; cf. I Tim. 3:16)[1] later theologians used these statements as "proof" that it was impossible for humans to be living on the other side of the earth (the antipodes). They reasoned that since Paul had clearly stated that the gospel was preached "unto the ends of the world[2]" and in that nobody had ever gone to the other side of the earth this meant that there could be no humans over there.

    Lactantius, the noted African Christian apologist against Stoic thought at the beginning of the 4th century and one of the most reprinted of the Latin Fathers, was content to mock believers in the possibility of people living on the opposite side of the planet writing:

    "How is it with those who imagine that there are antipodes opposite to our footsteps? Do they say anything to the purpose? Or is there any one so senseless as to believe that there are men whose footsteps are higher than their heads? or that the things which with us are in a recumbent position, with them hang in an inverted direction? that the crops and trees grow downwards? that the rains, and snow, and hail fall upwards to the earth? And does any one wonder that hanging gardens are mentioned among the seven wonders of the world, when philosophers make hanging fields, and seas, and cities, and mountains? The origin of this error must also be set forth by us. For they are always deceived in the same manner."


    He called them people who have "erred" and "consistently persevere in their folly and defend one vain thing by another."

    St. Augustine was considerably less amused. In his De Civitate Dei ("City of God") he declared that

    "Therefore we find it constantly declared that, as those preachers did not go to the antipodes, no antipodes can exist; hence that the supporters of this geographical doctrine give the lie directly to King David and to St. Paul, and therefore to the Holy Ghost."


    A few centuries later Isodore of Seville declared that "We cannot believe in the existence of a populace called 'Antipodae'." And not too long after we see that St. Boniface sought papal censure against another missionary in Germany for teaching that people lived at the antipodes among other things.

    Geocentrism is another example as is the notion that the firmament was a solid structure.










    1. And to a lesser extent Psalm 19 especially verse 4

    2 Irenaeus continued in this vein writing that, "Now the Church, spread throughout all the world even to the ends of the earth... even though she has been spread over the entire world," and "Anyone who wishes to see the truth can observe the apostle’s traditions made manifest in every church throughout the whole world" (Against Heresies, 1.10.1, 1.10.2, 3.3.1-2).

    I'm always still in trouble again

    You're by far the worst poster on TWeb -- starlight

  13. Amen Scrawly amen'd this post.
  14. #9
    tWebber 37818's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    So. California
    Faith
    Nontraditional Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,967
    Amen (Given)
    805
    Amen (Received)
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    . . . For instance, because Paul had declared that the entire world was hearing the gospel (Rom. 1:8; 10:18; 16:25-26; Col. 1:6, 23; cf. I Tim. 3:16) .
    . . .
    First off, the Apostle Paul made no such claim. Let us read those references:

    Romans 1:8, ". . . First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout[. . . εν . . .] the whole world. . . ." The Greek meaning "in," that is, within the whole world, is does not mean, nor does it say that was done everywhere, in every place.

    Romans 10:18 is referring to general, nature revelation, the Apostle v.18 citing from Psalm 19, Romans 10:17-18, ". . . So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. . . ."

    Romans 16:25-26, ". . . Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to[. . . εις . . .] all nations for the obedience of faith: . . ." The Greek meaning "into" all nations. Does not say all nations already have heard fully.
    This is the on going commandment.

    Colossians 1:6, . . 23, ". . . Which is come unto you, as [it is] in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as [it doth] also in you, since the day ye heard [of it], and knew the grace of God in truth: . . . _ . . . If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature [. . . παση τη κτισει . . .] which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; . . ." Echoing obediance to the command in Mark 16:15, ". . . παση τη κτισει . . . ."
    . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

  15. #10
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,658
    Amen (Given)
    151
    Amen (Received)
    548
    OK - Paul claimed that the gospel was made known in all the world (ROM 16), and was preached to every creature under heaven.

    So then - "made known" and "preached," being both aorist tense and indicative mood, show that the "preaching" and the "made known" happened prior to the time of writing.
    The arena is "all the world" and the target audience "every creature under heaven." That Paul didn't mean what he said doesn't seem to me a viable proposition - so to what can the apparent discrepancy be attributed?
    και εκζητησατε με και ευρησετε με οτι ζητησετε με εν ολη καρδία υμων

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •