One is God-breathed and one is not.If the Bible cannot be take literal then what is the point of it? If you can’t take one story within it as literal, then why should you take the idea of a god literal? Like previously mentioned, other books such as Lord of the Rings also presents us with the same or similar ideological concepts as the bible. So what is the difference?
Excellent question. Everyone has to eventually struggle through this question.If the Bible cannot be take literal then what is the point of it? If you can’t take one story within it as literal, then why should you take the idea of a god literal? Like previously mentioned, other books such as Lord of the Rings also presents us with the same or similar ideological concepts as the bible. So what is the difference?
And yet, some work so hard to “force” a literal interpretation For example, about the crucifixion, that mode of punishment was not merely about killing someone. It was about making a public point about what happens to people who do what Jesus did. To make that point, generally, a crucified body was left on public display for days or weeks. Why would the authorities put a body on public display, and then take it down after a couple of hours?The point is that literal truth is not necessary for ultimate truth. However, with the Bible, you are supposed to start with a literal reading, and grow into other depths. Some parts of the Bible can only be interpretted literally. Example: if there was no literal Jesus who literally died and literally came back to life, the entire religion of Christianity is FALSE, period, full stop, done deal. That’s not negotiable. There is no alternative.
Except that the Jews needed the body down before the Passover Sabbath.And yet, some work so hard to “force” a literal interpretation For example, about the crucifixion, that mode of punishment was not merely about killing someone. It was about making a public point about what happens to people who do what Jesus did. To make that point, generally, a crucified body was left on public display for days or weeks. Why would the authorities put a body on public display, and then take it down after a couple of hours?
They wouldn’t. So that part of the story is difficult to take literally, at least for me.
Scripture is polyvalent, that is, has many meanings and one of them is the literal. Yes, I take most of it literal. I say most because I can think of one verse that’s hard to take literal: Matt 5:29 which says, " And if thy right eye scandalize thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee…" The other meanings can be taken such as the spiritual. This would mean to turn away from seeing anything that may lead you to sin. If you read the context, Jesus is talking about what’s in the heart. Read the next few verses and you will see this. When I come across any verse I want to understand, I read it in context - I read the verses around it and any cross references.If the Bible cannot be take literal then what is the point of it? If you can’t take one story within it as literal, then why should you take the idea of a god literal? Like previously mentioned, other books such as Lord of the Rings also presents us with the same or similar ideological concepts as the bible. So what is the difference?
Is there an objective way for telling which parts are literal and which are not, without resorting to looking at the world around us?Without a doubt the Bible is to be taken literally. But it can also be interpreted in other ways too, such as life application, allegorically, analogically, etc.
Most of the time we interpret Scripture literally, but we must realize Scripture speaks metaphorically or symboically at times, which is not to be taken as anything but a symbol or metaphor. But it is proper to realize that those metaphors do mean something specifically and are not to be generalized or brushed off as something totally allegorical, at least not as the primary interpretation. Usually those metaphors and symbolic language can be understood clearly by other passages of Scripture or oftentimes good ol’ common sense. Some symbolic language such as we see in Revelation takes a great deal of study which requires all of Scripture to be consulted and factored in.Is there an objective way for telling which parts are literal and which are not, without resorting to looking at the world around us?
That is done by following the Church that Jesus Christ established, that is the Catholic Church.If it is God’s Holy Spirit that allows believers to correctly interpret scripture, to non-believers, it looks like foolishness…That’s why only believers can correctly interpret it.
How do we know when it’s God’s Holy Spirit guiding the believer and how do we tell when it’s just a nut case who wants to control others through his interpretation of scripture?
(emphasis added) Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You are forcing assumptions upon the text. You know, maybe that’s not what Roman governors did all the time. And maybe that’s never what they did at the three annual holiday seasons when 99% of the Jewish families in the whole world were in Jerusalem. Think “crowd control.” The crowd was big. The crowd wanted the bodies buried. Nobody wanted a riot. Ergo, it was in the best interest of everybody for the Roman governor to get the bodies off the crosses and get them buried.And yet, some work so hard to “force” a literal interpretation For example, about the crucifixion, that mode of punishment was not merely about killing someone. It was about making a public point about what happens to people who do what Jesus did. To make that point, generally, a crucified body was left on public display for days or weeks. Why would the authorities put a body on public display, and then take it down after a couple of hours?
They wouldn’t. So that part of the story is difficult to take literally, at least for me.
That doesn’t answer the question, though. Is there a way, using only the Bible, to tell what is literal and what is symbolic?Most of the time we interpret Scripture literally, but we must realize Scripture speaks metaphorically or symboically at times, which is not to be taken as anything but a symbol or metaphor. But it is proper to realize that those metaphors do mean something specifically and are not to be generalized or brushed off as something totally allegorical, at least not as the primary interpretation. Usually those metaphors and symbolic language can be understood clearly by other passages of Scripture or oftentimes good ol’ common sense. Some symbolic language such as we see in Revelation takes a great deal of study which requires all of Scripture to be consulted and factored in.
But we can also see from the New Testament that allegory has a place in interpreting Scripture, since the NT authors themselves did so, as well as analogically and morally.
what are the other 3 levels of interpretation?Excellent question. Everyone has to eventually struggle through this question.
The Church Fathers gave us four levels of interpretation. The first one is literal. That’s the starting place. If you can’t get that one, you can’t get the next three.
But after having absorbed the literal reading into one’s inner being, other and deeper meanings can be discerned. Consider: what’s the point of “Little Red Riding Hood” ? Is is a literal historical account? (No) But does it have meaning? (Yes) Does the lack of historical literal-ness detract from the meaning of the story? (No) .
So that is a “No” on being able to tell us which parts are metaphorical and which arn’t then.Most of the time we interpret Scripture literally, but we must realize Scripture speaks metaphorically or symboically at times, which is not to be taken as anything but a symbol or metaphor. But it is proper to realize that those metaphors do mean something specifically and are not to be generalized or brushed off as something totally allegorical, at least not as the primary interpretation. Usually those metaphors and symbolic language can be understood clearly by other passages of Scripture or oftentimes good ol’ common sense. Some symbolic language such as we see in Revelation takes a great deal of study which requires all of Scripture to be consulted and factored in.
So we have to already know which bits are alegory and which bits aren’t before we acan know which bits are alogory and which bits arn’t? :huh:But we can also see from the New Testament that allegory has a place in interpreting Scripture, since the NT authors themselves did so, as well as analogically and morally.
The traditional four levels are: literal, allegorical, moral, and eschatological.what are the other 3 levels of interpretation?
I believe that the elements of the crucifixion story were evolved into it by the influence of prophetic old testament scriptures. My own non-scholarly belief is that Jesus hung on the cross for a long time, at least for many days, and most likely the elements and scavengers took their toll.*“And yet, some work so hard to “force” a literal interpretation For example, about the crucifixion, that mode of punishment was not merely about killing someone. It was about making a public point about what happens to people who do what Jesus did. To make that point, generally, a crucified body was left on public display for days or weeks. Why would the authorities put a body on public display, and then take it down after a couple of hours?
They wouldn’t. So that part of the story is difficult to take literally, at least for me.” *
Where do you have Jesus picking up the rest of the Gospels, His 3 days in the tomb, His Resurrection?