Protestant denominations who don't take the bible literally

[Anonymous]

This is why Jesus said we must become as little children. Childlike faith is necessary to believe. If a church does not take the Bible literally I would run from it.
Intellectual pride is a huge stumbling block for many. They are not followers of Jesus but pretenders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe in creationism and natural selection, but not evolution. There is no evidence of mutations becoming new species. There is lots of evidence of natural selection weeding out mutation and strengthening within species . Lots of holes and weird unexplainable fossil evidence that contradicts all of it but always ignored.

Contradictory evidence means we have really no idea what the actual sequence of events was and how it all came to be. For some reason , scientists can't tolerate being potentially ignorant and they become really biased and kind of dumb.

I love it when a post makes me actually laugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is why Jesus said we must become as little children. Childlike faith is necessary to believe. If a church does not take the Bible literally I would run from it.
Intellectual pride is a huge stumbling block for many. They are not followers of Jesus but pretenders.

^^atheist trying to make a Christian look dumb?^^

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in creationism and natural selection, but not evolution. There is no evidence of mutations becoming new species. There is lots of evidence of natural selection weeding out mutation and strengthening within species . Lots of holes and weird unexplainable fossil evidence that contradicts all of it but always ignored.

Contradictory evidence means we have really no idea what the actual sequence of events was and how it all came to be. For some reason , scientists can't tolerate being potentially ignorant and they become really biased and kind of dumb.

I love it when a post makes me actually laugh.

I laughed too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in creationism and natural selection, but not evolution. There is no evidence of mutations becoming new species. There is lots of evidence of natural selection weeding out mutation and strengthening within species . Lots of holes and weird unexplainable fossil evidence that contradicts all of it but always ignored.

Contradictory evidence means we have really no idea what the actual sequence of events was and how it all came to be. For some reason , scientists can't tolerate being potentially ignorant and they become really biased and kind of dumb.

I love it when a post makes me actually laugh.

I laughed too.

Therefore God (for whom there is no evidence) did it! How is this known? It says so in an ancient holy book. Who says the book is holy? It says so in the book.

[Anonymous]

ELCA Lutherans
Catholics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I went to Vacation Bible School with my child this last week. One of the stories that was told was Genesis. Are there denominations which do not take the bible literally? The person teaching the bible lessons talked about what happened on year "day". OK let's say I can accept that each "day" was actually billions of years and that the bible tells stories that are not literally true. Is there a denomination for me?

why bother trying to make the bible make sense in modern terms? It's not a modern document and wasn't written by modern people or for modern people. It can simply be appreciated as an important ancient book - no need to "accept" it as anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But maybe it is a little hard to teach a less literal interpretation to elementary aged and preschool students.

OP I think you hit on part of the issue here. Especially for the preschool students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But maybe it is a little hard to teach a less literal interpretation to elementary aged and preschool students.

OP I think you hit on part of the issue here. Especially for the preschool students.

Interesting point -- little kids might naturally take it as "just a story." They hear so many stories and the Bible with its fantastical characters and story-lines sounds so much like the other stories they are told.

[Anonymous]

For the people who take the bible literally, how do you square the contradictions of detail among the gospels? How do you view the old tesament stories condoning slavery? What about the scientific evidence or lack thereof that directly contradicts some Bible stories?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the people who take the bible literally, how do you square the contradictions of detail among the gospels? How do you view the old tesament stories condoning slavery? What about the scientific evidence or lack thereof that directly contradicts some Bible stories?

I don't take the Bible literally, but know that some who do don't have a problem with contradictions. For instance, with the new testament stories, they just say that it's natural that versions of the same story would vary given the ancient times in which they are written and how slowly news traveled in those days. They will even say how remarkable it is that the stories don't contradict each other more than they do and that this is an indication of how fast the "good news" traveled, considering the times.

[Anonymous]

Both wisdom and faith are based on doubt, not blind belief in authority. The bible teaches this through the life and trials of Jesus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Both wisdom and faith are based on doubt, not blind belief in authority. The bible teaches this through the life and trials of Jesus.

What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who take the bible literally, how do you square the contradictions of detail among the gospels? How do you view the old tesament stories condoning slavery? What about the scientific evidence or lack thereof that directly contradicts some Bible stories?

I don't take the Bible literally, but know that some who do don't have a problem with contradictions. For instance, with the new testament stories, they just say that it's natural that versions of the same story would vary given the ancient times in which they are written and how slowly news traveled in those days. They will even say how remarkable it is that the stories don't contradict each other more than they do and that this is an indication of how fast the "good news" traveled, considering the times.

That's fine if you want to think that, that discrepancies are a sign of how fast the story traveled, but that means then that the Bible isn't a historically accurate source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I went to Vacation Bible School with my child this last week. One of the stories that was told was Genesis. Are there denominations which do not take the bible literally? The person teaching the bible lessons talked about what happened on year "day". OK let's say I can accept that each "day" was actually billions of years and that the bible tells stories that are not literally true. Is there a denomination for me?

why bother trying to make the bible make sense in modern terms? It's not a modern document and wasn't written by modern people or for modern people. It can simply be appreciated as an important ancient book - no need to "accept" it as anything else.

Yeah, that whole loving God and loving your neighbor bit is sooooo outdated.