FIND THE ANSWERS

Bible literalist what do you thank of christians that don't take the bible as literally true .?

Answer this question

  • Bible literalist what do you thank of christians that don't take the bible as literally true .?


Answers

Answer #1 | 17/02 2017 17:24
Its their own choice. God will call people back to the right way, if their heart is sincerely searching for Him.
Positive: 83 %
Answer #2 | 17/02 2017 17:22
They do so at their own peril and following lies not from the Bible.
Positive: 77 %
Answer #3 | 17/02 2017 17:19
I teach in Spiritual Warfare of those as being of satan's christians whom have millions of false doctrines ! JESUS BLESS YOU david stotler
Positive: 57 %
Answer #4 | 17/02 2017 16:54
I think they call God a lie The Bible is the inerrant word of God
Positive: 25 %
Answer #5 | 17/02 2017 16:51
Neither are they true.
Positive: 10 %
Answer #6 | 17/02 2017 18:17
John, Thank you for the question. BACKGROUND: To understand my answer, I suppose I need to give a little background first. When literalists use the term "literal" we don't mean it as "not figurative." We use "literal" in a technical sense - "according to literary genre" (you might prefer "literary"). We understand that in the Bible there are metaphors and figures of speech, and that poetical and wisdom literature should be treated differently than books of history. The reason we use "literal" in this way is because centuries ago a prominent way to interpret the Bible was by means of allegory. The idea was that since the Bible was the word of God, there must be deeper meanings that go beyond the authors' original intent. While I appreciate the thought - it was based upon a genuine belief of the divine origin of scripture - the practical effect of allegorical interpretation was that many teachers became unhinged from Scripture, always searching for some "hidden meaning." By contrast, the literal school of interpretation taught that authorial intent mattered, and that Bible teaching should be grounded by the meaning of the text itself, paying attention to genre, historical context, audience, etc. Today, one might call this a "historico-grammatical" approach to interpreting the Bible. ANSWER: I believe that the allegorical approach to interpreting the Bible makes the process overly subjective, John. I don't believe that the Bible is rife with "hidden meanings." The New Testament in particular was written in the common vernacular of the day - it was meant to be read by, and understood by, common people. I am sympathetic to those who are drawn to allegory because of a genuine belief in the Bible's divine origin, but I still disagree with them. ADDENDUM Nowadays when I hear people argue about the literal interpretation of the Bible, it usually has to do with the first six chapters of the book of Genesis. This is not a question of literal vs. allegory. This is because it is unpopular and intellectually dis-respectable to treat these chapters as historical narrative. I would have to judge on a case-by-case basis those who hold to a non-literal interpretation of these chapters, but I think that the allegorical position here is false, and that it even violates the rules Origen set up for allegorical interpretation. In brief, I believe one can honestly accept or reject the historical narrative view of these chapters, but I believe that the halfway position (that it is true on a "deeper level") is intellectually dishonest.
Positive: 10 %

Possible answer