Poll for Bible readers: Do you take the Bible literally?

[Anonymous]

Pp, where did you learn about the word "literally?" You're incorrect. If it is literally raining cats and dogs, there are actual cats and dogs falling from the clouds. If God literally measured the waters in his hand, it does mean that he used his actual hand. I don't actually care about your opinion. But I want to point out to you that your argument makes zero sense, if you're hung up on the incorrect definition of"literally."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

If not interested perhaps you should avoid this thread.

[Anonymous]

I always thought the Bible was a vehicle to impart certain things like food safety and good hygiene.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

That's what it is called in the Christian Bible. So, I will talk about it in those terms since I am a Christian. Since you don't want it to be called like that by Christians I guess you cannot have a conversation with Christians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

That's what it is called in the Christian Bible. So, I will talk about it in those terms since I am a Christian. Since you don't want it to be called like that by Christians I guess you cannot have a conversation with Christians.

Are all christians this disrespectful? Or are you a special case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

That's what it is called in the Christian Bible. So, I will talk about it in those terms since I am a Christian. Since you don't want it to be called like that by Christians I guess you cannot have a conversation with Christians.

Are all christians this disrespectful? Or are you a special case?

It's disrespectful to state that Old Testament is called Old Testament in Christian Bible? That's a really warped sense of reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

That's what it is called in the Christian Bible. So, I will talk about it in those terms since I am a Christian. Since you don't want it to be called like that by Christians I guess you cannot have a conversation with Christians.

Are all christians this disrespectful? Or are you a special case?

It's disrespectful to state that Old Testament is called Old Testament in Christian Bible? That's a really warped sense of reality.

No. The way you are speaking to the other PP.

[Anonymous]

No. I'm Catholic. I take the ten commandments literally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

That's what it is called in the Christian Bible. So, I will talk about it in those terms since I am a Christian. Since you don't want it to be called like that by Christians I guess you cannot have a conversation with Christians.

Are all christians this disrespectful? Or are you a special case?

It's disrespectful to state that Old Testament is called Old Testament in Christian Bible? That's a really warped sense of reality.

No. The way you are speaking to the other PP.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I just know I'll keep referring to Old Testament as Old Testament and I will call New Testament, well New Testament.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I take the bible literally. I am a non-denominational bible-believing Christian.

Notice how that the more people turn away from the bible, the more society seems to decline with more shootings, murders, rapes, and thugs running about as they do in Britain.

Also, the ability to get gay "marriage" acknowledged by law also corresponds with a decline of people taking the bible literally. There is a direct correlation between bible-believing and righteousness, for without the bible where shall we learn to be righteous? You do not learn righteousness without the Bible, you do whatever "feels right" to yourself. And then you get idiot politicians bemoaning those people who "cling to Religion", meaning, not clinging to the soft, lukewarm vomit religion of "I feel good so we are all good" but the SALT, the vibrant and living Word of God that convicts one of sin unto repentance.

When you abandon the Word of God, which is there for reproof and for teaching righteousness, then all that is left is listening to somebody in a pulpit tickling your ears to make you feel good. And because that person has no foundation in the Word of God, that person is easily led astray to a dead end where faith is lost, usually after losing a lot of money thinking sending in money will get you a fast track to God's big blessings.

The bible says at the time of the end there will be a great falling away. The first step to falling away from the faith is to stop reading the bible, and to stop taking it literally and instead accept "blind guides" telling you the bible is just a metaphor, as if "Thou Shalt Not Steal" is some kind of metaphor.

People are no different today than they were 2,000 years ago. Nothing has changed. A sinner in a chariot is no different than a sinner in an airplane. The bible is just as relevant for today as it was back then, even moreso as many liars are about doing their best to try and convince everyone the bible is untrue and irrelevant.

I listen to none of these people. Anything anyone tries to teach gets compared to what is in the bible. If they do not match, that person or textbook or whatever, is out and completely disregarded.

Since the previous attempt to separate people from their bibles by killing them failed, the new tactic is for the evil people with an appearance of intellect and learning to look down in condescension upon "that old book written by goat herders" so as to shame people from taking it seriously, to make false claims that "science has disproven it" --certainly not! and other such tactics.

FWIW I don't think it is gay people getting married that is responsible for that. I think it is the vehement Christian campaign to deprive gay people of marriage that has done that. It certainly did that for me. I was so disappointed that the Christian response was to deny people in love the ability to raise children in loving homes that it disgusted me and moved me farther away from the church.

When christians don't practice kindness, they alienate other christians IMO.

[Anonymous]

I was raised Catholic and have never taken the bible literally. It was written by fallible men and preached and shaped through oral history by fallible men and women.

I take the commandments seriously and I take the message seriously.

God love humans but we are flawed. We should do our best with our time on this earth to help and love other humans, regardless of their faults or foibles and we should not be distracted from these good works by temptations like money and notoriety. Personally I think that a lot of 'new' Christians, the ones in these big evangelical churches, wear their devout bible reading like a coat of armor and use it to defend against any claim that they are, otherwise in their life, not particularly charitable (not just $$ charitable but time and kindness of spirit charitable as well).

There is a certain group of people who think that studying and knowing the bible absolves them of the requirements to love all people and to be kind and without judgement.

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

No earthly person can fully claim to be without sin, so no earthly person should judge. They should offer help and kindness. Full stop. I don't understand how evangelicals claim to be the most devout but are the quickest to elevate themselves to the place of God and cast judgement on their fellow men and women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

That's what it is called in the Christian Bible. So, I will talk about it in those terms since I am a Christian. Since you don't want it to be called like that by Christians I guess you cannot have a conversation with Christians.

sorry to be unclear. I meant refrain from mentioning those books at all, whatever you call them.

Just as you don't want my judgement of Christianity, I don't want your judgement of Judaism. And when you form a judgement of the Hebrewbible/OT/Taanach, you are judging Judaism.

I can certainly have a respectful conversation with Christians. IF they acknowledge that the Christian view of the Hebrew Bible IS an interpretation, and is not a "literal" reading. That is all I pointed out above, and you (or someone else) responded with "well you don't care about us, we don't care about you".

IE you are fine with talking about the Hebrew bible regularly (I am sure you do in church, and probably in the public sphere), but when someone suggests that your view of it is not "literal", suddenly the conversation is disrespectful to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Almost the entire Old Testament is presented as history. Some of it is written in poetic language, but the story is clear: Man has rejected God, and the consequences of that rejection is very nasty. And God has provided Himself in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to reconcile to Himself those who would confess their sin and believe in Him.

That is absolutely not the story of the Hebrew bible. The story is that G-d liberated Israel from Egypt, G-d gave Israel the law, sometimes Israel sinned, sometimes Israel repented, and G-d makes abundantly clear that She will never give up on the people Israel, but will always love them, and will turn their hears back.

The NT interpretation you present is anything but a literal reading of the Hebrew bible.

You don't care about us. We don't care about you. Fair, no?

1. We can't avoid Christianity. It (still) pervades the culture. Even atheists tend to take the christian view of the "old" testament for granted.

2. The claim to take the bible literally, though not as pervasive, is widespread in the US, and impacts society and politics. Ergo we have a need to discuss what literal actually means

I am not particularly interested in your judgement of Christianity. Don't psychologize it.

I am not interested in your judgement of Judaism. Can you refrain from ever mentioning the "old" testament ever again?

That's what it is called in the Christian Bible. So, I will talk about it in those terms since I am a Christian. Since you don't want it to be called like that by Christians I guess you cannot have a conversation with Christians.

sorry to be unclear. I meant refrain from mentioning those books at all, whatever you call them.

Just as you don't want my judgement of Christianity, I don't want your judgement of Judaism. And when you form a judgement of the Hebrewbible/OT/Taanach, you are judging Judaism.

I can certainly have a respectful conversation with Christians. IF they acknowledge that the Christian view of the Hebrew Bible IS an interpretation, and is not a "literal" reading. That is all I pointed out above, and you (or someone else) responded with "well you don't care about us, we don't care about you".

IE you are fine with talking about the Hebrew bible regularly (I am sure you do in church, and probably in the public sphere), but when someone suggests that your view of it is not "literal", suddenly the conversation is disrespectful to you.

Well, I am sorry to disappoint you but in Christian catechism Old Testament is taken literally by some believers and it's called Old Testament and it is one of the two main books of the Christian Bible. It's not a "view" to Christians, it is their holy book. We simply call it what it is: Christian Bible, but if that's not acceptable to you I cannot help you. I guess you'll need to go out there and try to ban all Christians that take the Old Testament literally from believing what they believe in.