What is to be taken literally?

Soul Slay "How do we know what is meatn to be taken literally and what isn't?"Maybe your confusion on this lies in that which confuses others. Jesus is not God, with this not being the topic, I will not refer to it furthur, for now, but it's important to mention for my explanation. When Jesus speaks, he speaks in parables so that he could accomplish what was to be completed before His execution. When God speaks it is matter of fact.

---

Angel

Hi SoulSlay,You asked:

quote:

---

What I'm asking is, what about the ones that are not obvious? How do we know which catagory they fall into?

---

Can you post some of the scripture that you are asking about? It is unlikely that you will get your answer without us knowing what scripture you are referring to. What may be obvious to others may not be obvious to you, on the same token, what you may see as obvious, may not be obvious to others.

---

Angel

Hi Proboscis

quote:

---

Jesus makes it clear, "I am the way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me." What do you think he means with this?

---

Simple answer, Noone comes to God without going through Jesus, He died for your sins, and now has the authority. It doesn't say no one comes to me but through me.

quote:

---

Or how about this, "I and the Father are one"

---

Yes, so they are together as one. Which is the same as saying we are one nation, but millions of seperate individuals. They are united, they stand together, they are one. But still they are two seperate Beings.

---

Angel

Ifen,

quote:

---

Jesus is like a wormhole that we dive into and exit this universe to arrive in the heaven that we haven't observed in our universe?

---

No, that is not what that meant, I can't tell if you are asking real questions, or if you are just trying to be obnoxious. Because I made it through college, does that mean that I literally went through the front door and out the back?

---

Angel

quote:

---

What do you think it means to look on God's face or back?

---

To look upon His back would be a blessing, to look upon His face would be death.

---

Angel

quote:

---

When we read the Bible we need to read all of it and not just cherry pick a line here and a line there to meet our preconcieved notions. We need understand that is it a book, written by many authors, each suffering from his own limits, preconceptions, political leanings and hubris. It was later redacted and vetted by other equally fallible humans to serve the needs they saw at a particular moment in history.

---

You have absolutely NO argument from me on this point! I have a minor in religion, and am well aware of all of these facts.

---

Angel

quote:

---

Why? Why death? Why death from the front and a blessing from behind?

---

Because God said that to look upon His face meant death. For me to be able to see His back, would be the greatest gift ever, a blessing, which is an oppinion, IOW you do not have to feel the same, and thats ok.

quote:

---

In another message you said we are created in God's image, and that God has a face with eyes, ears, etc. (What color is His hair?)

---

I do not know the color of His hair, nor have I seen His face, if I had, I wouldn't be here typing this now. I gather though that this was meant to be a rhetorical question.

quote:

---

Wouldn't looking into the face of God be like looking in the mirror?

---

Father=male....no, I am a female. Now for another obvious answer....When you look in the mirror, do you see me? No, you don't, does that mean that we do not have the same features aka..eyes, ears, nose, mouth? Another rhetorical question, I assume.

---

Angel

quote:

---

When someone states that they have knowledge about God's appearance it seems a completely reasonable question.

---

I have knowledge of His appearance, as I have knowledge of yours, I have never seen you, but would naturally assume that you have eyes, ears, etc. Am I correct in assuming this?

quote:

---

So then we weren't all created in His image, or at least women are made less in His image than men are.

---

Well, lets see women were made for man, so yes, I guess we would fall under that catagory. I do not have a problem admitting that my husband has authority in my house. Not that I have no input, but he does and always will have final say. I say this because I get the impression that you feel men and women are equal, and in many ways they are, but in many ways they aren't. Another post at another time though I guess.

quote:

---

What leads you to believe that "created in His own image" literally refers to God's physical appearance, rather than spiritual make-up?

---

Have you not read the Old Testament? If you have, do you not recall when God gave Moses a favor? Moses seen His back, but couldn't see His face?

---

Angel

Maybe I should give you some background on myself, I have a Minor in Religion, and I have a PhD in Psychology. I am aware of every mental disorder. Now with that said, I don't recall ever saying that I identify anyone, or any Being, by their body itself. I have answered the question, of what I felt God looked like. Never have I identified anyone as being a simple body.

quote:

---

I asking you seriously who or what do you think you are?

---

I am a human being, I have flesh, yes. But personality (a sense of ones self) comes from the brain in the form of an identity. My body is just a body, my soul, is what is important.

---

Angel

quote:

---

(Your characteristic list would also describe, say, an ostrich; so I'm not sure how amazing of an assumption you are making there...)

---

Funny you would say that, since I was characterizing you? Doesn't matter, not the point. BTW ostriches have beaks, not mouths.

quote:

---

Do you think God has a penis?

---

I would assume that He does. Though I really don't see anything from this question, but someone trying to play games, instead of asking real questions for discussion?

quote:

---

I do think men and women are equal but different; so are men and men, and women and women. There are whole threads about this subject - a week or two ago they were looking for a female with your perspective...

---

Great, I am sure the women would have loved to hear my replys (rhetorical). But, anytime, anywhere, I will back that topic up.

quote:

---

I'll ask again - why do you take this to literally mean a physical back?

---

And again I will answer literal, it doesn't matter how many times you ask me, you are still going to recieve the same response.

quote:

---

I feel like you are missing my intent in this thread - why is it that you take any mention of seeing God or God's image in a literal, physical vein?

---

I am afraid that I am not missing the point of your question, but rather, you do not want to except my answer. Which is fine with me. Again it is LITERAL because of the scriptures in the OT. LITERAL.

---

Angel

Again, and for the last time, I take it literally because that is what is taught in the scriptures. It leaves room for no other conclusion but a literal one (when speaking to Moses). Furthermore, why is this important to you? You obviously don't believe in God, I take that from your rhetorical comments/'questions'. So why is it important for you to know why I believe that man was literally made in Gods own image. The Bible leads to no other conclusion but that it is to be taken literally. You could also argue, I presume, that Jesus was not to be takin literally. The question has been answered, maybe it's not the one that you want, but it has been answered.

---

Angel

quote:

---

It seems you think people who disagree with you about God's "body" don't believe in God - that is extremely close-minded, not to mention downright rude.

---

Wooooo, No that is not even close to what I said. I see that you like to take peoples words and make them your own. For starters it i s obvious that you don't. I don't condemn you for it, I was only making a realitistic comment. We really don't want to get on the subject of rudeness now do we? Look back at your 'questions' and see the answer.

quote:

---

I could easily throw it back in your face, and state that you obviously don't have a true relationship with God, otherwise you wouldn't have such simplistic notions about His "body". But I'm not saying that - because different people approach God in different ways.

---

So, let me see if I am hearing you correctly, because I believe what God said is the truth, I don't believe in him.? That is almost comical.

quote:

---

By the way, I haven't asked any rhetorical questions. That is why when some of them weren't answered, I asked them again.

---

Really, I seem to remember a few rhetorical questions. Again, maybe you should look back at your 'questions'.

quote:

---

Perhaps what is obvious to you is not so obvious to others.

---

Yes, I know this. However, when something has been answered over and over again, it gets to the point where you just have to agree to disagree. I have said that it is ok that you don't believe as I do, you on the other hand, want to keep the same question, though already answered, repeating. I will say it again, in case you missed it. IT IS OK FOR YOU NOT TO BELIEVE AS I DO.

quote:

---

(It seemed you were having similar issues with lfen - I assure you, we are both honest with our questions.)

---

Who, I might add unlike yourself, admitted that it was an honest question on his/her part stated in a rhetorical manner.

quote:

---

Being an open-minded person, I try to understand other people's point of view. You are the first person I've ever heard state that God has physical genitalia. I'm interested in understanding that point of view.

---

Maybe you are not as 'open-minded' as you think. Especially if something like this gets you so wound up. I have no reason to think that He doesn't. I have no proof that He doesn't. Let's turn this around, what proof do you have that He doesn't? And why do you feel that way? Proof, not belief, because obviously you do not accept belief as a ligitamate answer, so show me proof, evidence.

quote:

---

You've said this a few times, but haven't explained why no other conclusions can be made.

---

Well, yes I have, but for arguments sake, I will explain why again. If God can cover Moses eyes with His hand, and if Moses can physically see His back, and if someone, though they wouldn't live to tell it, can see His face. That has to lead to one conclusion, that He has hands, a back, and a face. How is it that that is so hard to understand? You don't have to agree, but you have to accept that I feel this way, and believe this way.

quote:

---

If you make an assertion, be prepared to have someone ask what the foundation for that assertion is.

---

Really? I am glad that you feel that way, and I am looking forward to your response with some facts, not belief, facts to my above question.

quote:

---

Simply frustratingly restating the assertion several times is not the same as explaining it or backing it up.

---

Again, I answered your question, it just doesn't seem to be the one that suits you. It is meant to be literal, because it is written literally. If you can physically see something, that would make it physical, am I correct, or has there been a new scientific advance that I am not aware of? Since I take it that He has a physical body, because it is written that He does, that makes it literal. Can you honestly not find my answer? It isn't written in a parable, which may be confusing, it is written to be taken literally.

---

Angel

quote:

---

You've proven your close-minded nature by claiming that I "obviously" don't believe in God because I don't take the same parts of the Bible literally as you do.

---

Really? Can you honestly say that you do? If stating something such as that offends you, I see no reason for it. Furthermore, I would like for you to quote where I said that I was right and you were wrong? I am very open minded when it comes to the Bible, so your statement happens to be false. The reason behind me saying that was simple, it was the wording in your rhetorical questions.

quote:

---

Do you see how obnoxious that is?

---

No, what I see as obnoxious is your continuation of the same exact question, after it has been answered over and over again. Just because you don't agree with me, doesn't make you right. Just because I don't agree with you, doesn't make me right. You asked for an explanation of why I FELT it was literal, and I answered how I FELT it was literal.

quote:

---

Is your brand of Christianity the only correct one?

---

My 'brand'? No, it's not. No one is perfect, that includes me. Also, even if it doesn't appeal to you, it includes you too. I have learned alot from discussions, and I have taught alot through discussions, if I felt that I was right about everything, well....what is the point in discussing? I, unlike a few others, like to discuss things without carrying it to an argument.~~~~Good Day~~~~

---

Angel

quote:

---

I asked the question repeatedly because I never got an answer, NOT because I thought I was right and you were wrong. (I also never claimed that you said you were right and I was wrong, and I never said the opposite - so I'm not sure why you repeat such things). When I asked you why "no other conclusion" then yours could be made, you simply answered that it was the conclusion you had made. That alone doesn't tell me why you made that conclusion.

---

In message 21 I said this:

quote:

---

To look upon His back would be a blessing, to look upon His face would be death.

---

then you asked:

quote:

---

Why? Why death? Why death from the front and a blessing from behind?

---

and I replied:

quote:

---

Because God said that to look upon His face meant death. For me to be able to see His back, would be the greatest gift ever, a blessing, which is an oppinion, IOW you do not have to feel the same, and thats ok.

---

Now I ask you, how doesn't that answer your question? What exactly are you wanting to know?You also asked:

quote:

---

In another message you said we are created in God's image, and that God has a face with eyes, ears, etc. (What color is His hair?)

---

This is the list of explanations given to you:

quote:

---

I do not know the color of His hair, nor have I seen His face, if I had, I wouldn't be here typing this now. I gather though that this was meant to be a rhetorical question.
Father=male....no, I am a female. Now for another obvious answer....When you look in the mirror, do you see me? No, you don't, does that mean that we do not have the same features aka..eyes, ears, nose, mouth? Another rhetorical question, I assume.
I have knowledge of His appearance, as I have knowledge of yours, I have never seen you, but would naturally assume that you have eyes, ears, etc. Am I correct in assuming this?
Well, lets see women were made for man, so yes, I guess we would fall under that catagory. I do not have a problem admitting that my husband has authority in my house. Not that I have no input, but he does and always will have final say. I say this because I get the impression that you feel men and women are equal, and in many ways they are, but in many ways they aren't. Another post at another time though I guess.
Have you not read the Old Testament? If you have, do you not recall when God gave Moses a favor? Moses seen His back, but couldn't see His face?
Maybe I should give you some background on myself, I have a Minor in Religion, and I have a PhD in Psychology. I am aware of every mental disorder. Now with that said, I don't recall ever saying that I identify anyone, or any Being, by their body itself. I have answered the question, of what I felt God looked like. Never have I identified anyone as being a simple body.
I am a human being, I have flesh, yes. But personality (a sense of ones self) comes from the brain in the form of an identity. My body is just a body, my soul, is what is important.
And again I will answer literal, it doesn't matter how many times you ask me, you are still going to recieve the same response.
I am afraid that I am not missing the point of your question, but rather, you do not want to except my answer. Which is fine with me. Again it is LITERAL because of the scriptures in the OT. LITERAL.
Again, and for the last time, I take it literally because that is what is taught in the scriptures. It leaves room for no other conclusion but a literal one (when speaking to Moses).
The Bible leads to no other conclusion but that it is to be taken literally. You could also argue, I presume, that Jesus was not to be takin literally. The question has been answered, maybe it's not the one that you want, but it has been answered.
Yes, I know this. However, when something has been answered over and over again, it gets to the point where you just have to agree to disagree. I have said that it is ok that you don't believe as I do, you on the other hand, want to keep the same question, though already answered, repeating. I will say it again, in case you missed it. IT IS OK FOR YOU NOT TO BELIEVE AS I DO.
Maybe you are not as 'open-minded' as you think. Especially if something like this gets you so wound up. I have no reason to think that He doesn't. I have no proof that He doesn't. Let's turn this around, what proof do you have that He doesn't? And why do you feel that way? Proof, not belief, because obviously you do not accept belief as a ligitamate answer, so show me proof, evidence.
Well, yes I have, but for arguments sake, I will explain why again. If God can cover Moses eyes with His hand, and if Moses can physically see His back, and if someone, though they wouldn't live to tell it, can see His face. That has to lead to one conclusion, that He has hands, a back, and a face. How is it that that is so hard to understand? You don't have to agree, but you have to accept that I feel this way, and believe this way.
Really? I am glad that you feel that way, and I am looking forward to your response with some facts, not belief, facts to my above question.
Again, I answered your question, it just doesn't seem to be the one that suits you. It is meant to be literal, because it is written literally. If you can physically see something, that would make it physical, am I correct, or has there been a new scientific advance that I am not aware of? Since I take it that He has a physical body, because it is written that He does, that makes it literal. Can you honestly not find my answer? It isn't written in a parable, which may be confusing, it is written to be taken literally.

---

Then this is your question again:

quote:

---

I was interested in the "why", not just the conclusion.

---

Messages 32, 40, and 44 should have answered why:

quote:

---

Again, and for the last time, I take it literally because that is what is taught in the scriptures. It leaves room for no other conclusion but a literal one (when speaking to Moses).

---

This is why, why is it so hard for you to accept my answer, do you have proof otherwise, because as I said before, I would love to see it!

quote:

---

I guess I'm not sure why you are taking part in a discussion if you don't want to go into any more detail than "I think this, you think that, and it's okay that we think differently." To me it's not much of a discussion if the participants don't discuss the foundation of their thoughts.

---

Though I agree this isn't much of a discussion, seeing as how I am doing all of the discussing. It's funny that you keep saying that I haven't answered your question, which I have, but when you are asked a question, you ignore it. Why is that?

quote:

---

In any case, I reiterate that it is poor form to call someone an unbeliever over such a disagreement.(You claim you can tell by the wording of my rhetorical questions; but I honestly didn't ask any rhetorical questions, so I have no way of knowing what you are referring to...)

---

And on this point it may be valid, IF you are then I apologize, however, in the future you should probably refrain from questions such as this if you are....

quote:

---

Do you think God has a penis?

---

So, if that isn't a rhetorical question, it sure was posted to sound like one.

---

Angel

quote:

---

By any chance you are a Mormon??

---

No, I am not a Mormon. I do not believe in organized religion period. Jesus was/is not a Mormon, JW, Baptist, Catholic, etc. So why should anyone else? Just a thought.

---

Angel