What is to be taken literally?

Jesus often spoke with parables and symbols, so what of what he dais did he mean literally and what just a metaphor. He said 'if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out' and i hope he wan speaking metaphorically. God said, 'don't commit adultery, and I think he meant it literally. How do we know what is meatn to be taken literally and what isn't?

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

How about if it is plain, the words attributed to Jesus is a parable, but if open to interpretation, the words are a parable. Also, when something is obviously not literally true, it is a parable.Like 'You are all gods', or "I am the way , the truth the light, and no one goes to the father execpt through me"

ya, but the question is: where is the line drawn of what is open to iterpretatoin and what is not? And if a verse is open to interpretation, doesn't that mean people will interpret it differently? Does god want us walking around with different values, saying they're the same?

I feel when it is blatantly obvious that it is not meant to be taken literally then it is the only time when it is open for a less strict interpretation of the given text.An example of this would be an omnipotent God who had just created the entire Universe being subject to "rest" on the seventh "day". Any individual that would argue that an all-powerful God would require rest, as stated by the strict, literal interpretation of the text, needs to reevaluate their belief system and the contradictory implications of such close-minded analysis.

Why take any of it literally? Which is more difficult to believe? That exertion requires subsequent rest? Or, that there's an invisible guy who created the universe? Who is to say whether "an omnipotent God" does or does not need rest? If one is to doubt that he needs rest then why not doubt that he exists?db

come to think of it...Why would god wanna take steps at all?I mean, why did he creat things in any given order. Couldn't he had just snaped his fingers and made it all apear?I would say, any passage where god hesitates, or thinks about actions, in any way. Is surely not litteral.This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-07-2004 09:12 AM

where your southern baptist preacher says it ought, naturally.that's why we can all read. take it as you like. that's why god is a 'personal' god. and why organized religion is a money-grubbing whore.

If all of the Bible were but tales told around the campfire, would the message contained and the lessons to be learned be any different?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well said!And nowadays, she's the [f 'ing] mother of her country.We know she's been to bed with Tom, Dick, and Harry. And now, apparently, it's Georgie. But who is surprised?db

Oh Yaro...you drive me nuts...:{ You know...you might have a pretty head on you, but it's one that's hard to reason with...lolIf only it were possible to speak in person to you, or in a one-on-one conversation, it might be easier to explain things to you in a way so that things make more sense. I'm sorry it is so hard for you to grasp anything that is related to christianity. I just can't stop shaking my head when I read your posts...wondering if it's hopeless. But I don't think it is, seriously.This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 11-07-2004 05:30 PM

---

~Lysimachus

quote:

---

and why organized religion is a money-grubbing whore.

---

You hit the nail on the head brennakimi. True christianity was never meant to be a money making system, or turn itself into an organization. Catholics, Baptists, SDAs, Methodists, Lutherans, and many other Protestant demoniations---that's exactly what they are---money making organizations that just lull the people to sleep and don't really teach them.Jesus broke himself away from the Synagogue and preached to both Jews and Gentiles alike and taught his disciples. That's how he spent His time--not preaching to some congregation that sat in the pews weekly only to go home and fall back in their same old ways. God's true church is composed of those faithful bible-commandment keeping people of God, NOT a particular organization or structure that composes expensive buildings. This is why my family and I have "home church".

---

~Lysimachus

Well... Im all ears then.Why would god need to take steps, rest, or change his mind?If god is all knowing he would not need to hesitate, change his mind, regret, or make mistakes.If he is all powerfull he would have no need of rest, or of creation in a sequential-process.Both those things are obviously human traits ascribed to god. If there is a god, he surely wouldn't have those traits.Assuming the bible is true, and that at least some of it is allegorical, I propose that we interpret sections where god is viewd as having the above traits as allegory.Why would you disagree with this? Or is there something that I am missing?BTW, I used to be a christian, I spent the better part of my youth going to a small evangelical private school. I have a fairly good grasp of the religion.This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-07-2004 05:59 PM

this is and interesting question, we must consider that many of the traits that give humans the capacity for belief are heritable. and of clear evolutionary advantage. so i would say that the parts of teh bible to take literally is entirely dependant on what your parents think....so we should all ask mum and dad...after all its a natural progression... why "because dad said so", why "because god said so"

Yaro, your objections to taking the story of creation literally are legitimate ones. Do not let anyone tell you otherwise.If the book of Revelations can be taken symbolically (which most Protestants believe), why can' t the story of Creation? With that being said, the very nature of God must be somehow related allegorically to that story in Genesis (assuming it was inspired by God, of course.) We should look at God wholistically as a deity and as someone that we are created in the image of. Sometimes we fail to acknowledge that, Biblically speaking, we are created in His image.Perhaps there is an equilibrium between a god consisting of all of man's characteristics and a god whose stoic and immune to all human emotion, mindset, and will which describes His true nature?