Gallup Poll: Better Than 1 in 4 Americans Believe the Bible is the 'Actual Word of God'

Editor and Publisher ^ | May 22, 2006 | Gallup Poll

[JamesP81]

How about when you said "A god that couldn't prevent mankind from destroying or corrupting his message, frankly, isn't a god worth worshipping."

Let's hypothesize for a moment. Let's say that god really can't prevent man from corrupting his Word. If he can't do that, what makes you think he can save your soul? It doesn't make sense if you have any idea of who and what He is.

Any being that can craft this universe we live in is more than capable of getting His message out, no matter what man decides to do.

[Dave S]

Instead of reposting the same thing, try answering the questions.

That wasnt a response to you fellow. Guess the Holy Spirit isnt working for you. That was a correction of my original post where I screwed up the HTML. Get a grip, you're losing it.

[Dave S]

In one place the Bible refers to God as having wings and feathers. Clearly this, when read in context, was intended figuratively, as anyone with even a passing knowledge would recognize, your argument notwithstanding

So how would the 28% literalists describe God? Is He a burning bush? A bright light? A long white haired white man sitting on a throne?

[Dave S]

Let's say that god really can't prevent man from corrupting his Word. If he can't do that, what makes you think he can save your soul? It doesn't make sense if you have any idea of who and what He is.

For the same reason that man doesnt always do what God would want him to do. FREEWILL. Man is free to believe that something is literally true when it wasnt meant that way because God isnt going to force us to use our brains. To have a simplistic Sunday School faith takes less true faith than to believe without a having a hard answer for everything. I mean if you know something is a fact, than you dont have a belief. You can only have a belief in something that is unknowable.

[JamesP81]

For the same reason that man doesnt always do what God would want him to do. FREEWILL.

Last time I checked, God also has free will.

[JohnnyZ]

That actually is a very, very bad number.

Let me provide an advanced mathematical perspective:

The number of those backing the "literal" view was 28%, with 49% selecting the "inspired word of God" option

77% believe the Bible accurately communicates God's truth.

[JohnnyZ]

In one place the Bible refers to God as having wings and feathers. Clearly this, when read in context, was intended figuratively

Oh really? Have you ever considered that humans were created in the image and likeness of God, with wings and feathers, in order to blend in with the unsuspecting avian descendents of the dinosaurs, and then evolved into our present form?

[italianquaker]

i dont know

[JohnnyZ]

To have a simplistic Sunday School faith takes less true faith than to believe without a having a hard answer for everything.

Don't knock the faith of little children .... I think people often undervalue non-intellectual faith.

[MeanWestTexan]

"In one place the Bible refers to God as having wings and feathers."

Psalm 91

"He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High
will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. [a]

2 I will say [b] of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress,
my God, in whom I trust."

3 Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare
and from the deadly pestilence.

4 He will cover you with his feathers,
and under his wings you will find refuge;
his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

5 You will not fear the terror of night,
nor the arrow that flies by day,. . . . "

[MeanWestTexan]

"So how would the 28% literalists describe God? Is He a burning bush? A bright light? A long white haired white man sitting on a throne?"

Yes.

(And don't forget "spirit," as an angel, column of smoke, etc.)

[MeanWestTexan]

"What exactly is positive about it? Little children will believe almost anything."

Well, the primary source of that are iterations of this teaching:

"Let the children come to Me. Don't stop them! For the Kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I assure you, anyone who doesn't have their kind of faith will never get into the Kingdom of God."
- Mark 10:14-15 NLT

I believe the childlike qualities God desires: humility, trust, and a lack of cynicism.

Being humble, trusting God, and not being cynical to God's promises, are postive things, IMHO. (<--- pun intended)

[NZerFromHK]

25% would be way toooooo high for a place like New Zealand or Britain. Perhaps 2 or 3% would be a more accurate figure.

[TXnMA]

You cynic you...

Yes indeedy! ;-)

I consider Gallup to be part of the MSM -- and fomenting division between Christians is exactly what I would expect from the MSM...

[Alex Murphy]

Ping to read later.

[TXnMA]

Yep!

[NZerFromHK]

In fact if you have ever met Asian Christians (yes the very brothers in Christ that American Christians tout as stellar examples of Christian growth), like such:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1045053/posts

Bear in mind most would be more conservative socially than James Dobson, but politically they are as liberal as Noam Chomsky when it comes to US foreign/defence policies and capitalism/socialism. Many of their relatives who come to the US keep these attitudes. In Asia some of the most hardcore socialist and anti-American people I meet are from the evangelical churches, but socially they are very conservative.

[Irish Rose]

That's the Muslim view of Scripture, not the Christian one. Christians believe that the Word of God can survive translation intact. It won't crumble - even if translators get the number of people on board the ship Paul sailed in wrong. As for the Muslims...well, they won't even admit Mohammed was literate. It's not very likely they approve the idea of translating the Koran from its original language.

[TheBlueMax]

This is a reply to both MACVSOG68 and to you BamaFan... While I can surely agree with each of your premises that throughout the ages there have been numerous translations, some of them poorly adapted, which are no longer even considered authentic or reliable. Additionally, your point is well taken in that numerous other "books" of "scripture" are not included in the current Protestant Bible. However, that being said, I believe that throughout the several councils which codified the books into current Scripture, I will take it as a matter of faith that what has been included in the Bible is the Word of God, not what isn't included. I meant no disrespect to anyone by my reply, but faith in basic doctrine is either foundational or it isn't. That's my only point. Sorry if you took offense.