T
Tom
Guest
There is a vast difference in literal and true. You use them as if they are synonymous. When asked why He taught in parables, Jesus answered that this was the way His Father chooses to teach us. A parable is a story to explain, it isn’t to be taken literally. To say it isn’t literal does not mean it isn’t true. Jesus uses many parables to teach us, they aren’t lies; they are true, but not necessarily literal. If God the Father teaches us in parables, which Jesus says He does, then many of the Old Testament stories must also be parables. Which ones? Who cares? If you’re trying to prove or disprove the stories, you’re missing the point. I have no proof that a man named Noah really built an ark, whether he even existed or not isn’t important. God is teaching me something in the story, not in the history.
laforec:
I have read that the Bible is the infallible, inspired and inerrant word of God… so if this is true, how could some stories not be true? Are they a lie? The Bible is inerrant. The stories teach you truth, they are not lies but they are also not all to be taken literally. It’s pretty easy to discern the truth from the parable. For example, the true presence in the Eucharist. Jesus taught His presence once, then a second time, then a third time, using different words but always relaying the same message. Then He had Paul explain the true presence, and then Paul warns us about not discerning the true presence. Jesus teaches us at least four different times, insures Paul and the rest of the Apostles understand. Have the Apostles warn against receiving the Eucharist without discerning. Should we take it literally?
hawkeye:
Not literal does not mean not true.