Posted on 03/18/2024 5:34:35 PM PDT by grumpa
Some things Christians believe are curious to me. For example, many conservative evangelical Christians, the group which I generally consider myself to be a part, proudly say, “We take the Bible literally.” Indeed, they use this statement as a test for orthodoxy. Well, here are few questions I’d like to ask them:
• When Jesus said that He is the vine (John 15:5), did He mean that He is a plant?
• Is God literally a rock (2 Samuel 22:3; Psalm 18:2, etc.)?
• Should we literally hate our mother and father so that we can be Jesus’ disciple (Luke 14:26)?
• If your eye causes you to sin, should you literally pluck it out, as Jesus said (Mark 9:47)?
• Must we sell everything we have and give it to the poor in order to inherit eternal life (Luke 18:18-22)?
• Is it necessary to literally eat Christ’s body in order to have life (John 6:53)?
• Did the mountains and the hills really break into song and the trees clap their hands (Isaiah 55:12)?
• Is it literally true that serpents and scorpions cannot harm Christians (Luke 10:19)?
• Would the moon literally turn to blood before the Day of the Lord (Joel 2:31)?
• When God judged Babylon, an event in actual history, did the stars and sun literally stop giving their light (Isaiah 13:10) and the heavens literally tremble (Isaiah 13:13)? When God judged Edom, did the sky literally roll up like a scroll (Isaiah 34:4)? When God judged Israel, according to Micah 1:2-16, did the mountains literally melt and the valleys split? When God judged Egypt, did He literally come riding on a cloud (Isaiah 19:1)? Read these passages and numerous others like them in the Bible (for example, Isaiah 24:23; Ezekiel 32:7; Amos 5:20; 8:9; Zephaniah 1:15)
This is especially pertinent to Bible prophecy. In light of the last bullet point above, consider what do you think of Matthew 24:29-31 which describes Jesus’ Parousia (“Second Coming”) with similar language: sun will be darkened, stars falling from heaven, Jesus riding on a cloud, etc. This is what theologians call “Hebraic apocalyptic language.” It is poetic language usually used when YHWH (or Jesus) judged people or nations.
It is a rational inference that given the non-literal nature of the similar Old Testament passages, that similar New Testament passages are also non-literal. Such New Testament passages are about Jesus coming “in judgment” against apostate old covenant Israel in AD 70―similar to how YHWH came in judgment in the Old Testament―and not about a literal bodily appearance. This is reinforced by the numerous time statements that limit the Second Coming to the first century.
Some Christians may insist that, indeed, even these passages are to be understood “literally.” But certainly at least some of these are examples of how the Bible uses a variety of language techniques to describe real things in NON-literal language.
I have a conservative view of the Bible and believe that it is the inspired Word of God in its entirety—and that it communicates a literal sense even when it employs non-literal genres. But that does not mean that every word or phrase was meant to be taken in a wooden literal sense. The fact is that nobody is a consistent literalist, nor should anyone be!
In our everyday language, we use figures of speech so often that we do not even think about them. We sing metaphorically “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.” We say things like “I could eat a horse,” “cat got your tongue,” “the four corners of the earth,” “the sky is falling,” “coming apart at the seams,” “he has a yellow streak down his back,” etc. We use hundreds of such idioms that are not literal, but people in our culture understand exactly what is meant.
The Bible too uses a variety of literary devices. It uses parables, poetry, hyperbole, allegories, metaphors, and many other figures of speech. In particular, it is common in the Bible to use astronomical language to describe important prophetic events. These events are often when God “came down” in judgment against the Jews or their enemies.
Hebraic terminology may be unfamiliar to us but was clearly understood by first-century Jews. Certain events prophesied in the Bible in Hebraic apocalyptic language we know for certain have already been fulfilled, such as God’s judgments upon Babylon and Edom (above).
Are there times when we should understand the Bible literally? Of course! But, should we really interpret the Bible “literally” in every instance? Of course not. It is more faithful to Scripture to interpret each passage the way it was INTENDED in its context and understood by its original audience.
Theologians call this “audience relevance.” An example is Matthew 24:34 where Jesus spoke of the timing of certain prophesied events: “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” Here Jesus is speaking to his disciples who asked a question in response to Jesus predicting the destruction of the temple and the close of the old covenant age―at his Parousia: “Tell us, when will things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and the close of the age?” (Matthew 24:3) Many Christians today futurize “this generation” to mean some future generation. But clearly Jesus’ disciples would have understood that the things Jesus predicted would happen while some of those living in the first century were still alive.
Another important interpretive technique is using “Scripture to interpret Scripture.” For example, related to Matthew 24 is the statement Jesus made in Matthew 16:27-28― “For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming his kingdom.” This passage demands that Jesus’ Parousia would occur while some of those living in the first century were still alive―Scripture interpreting Scripture.
One can attempt to explain these things away. But this is so clear and so powerful that if Jesus failed to return when He said He would, Jesus is reduced to a false prophet and Christianity falls―as opponents of Christianity charge. Either Jesus was a false prophet, or else many Christians have a mistaken understanding of the nature of the Second Coming. A correct understanding of biblical language proves the critics of Jesus wrong. He did come in the nature and timing that He predicted.
I’m fully aware that this is new information for some. But what’s at stake is the authority of Jesus and the inerrancy of the biblical writers. At my website I have several articles going into more depth about the timing and nature of the Second Coming. I hope you find these articles helpful:
Spiritual things are spiritually discerned.
It’s that kind of specific, detailed explanation that makes it crystal clear.
“Are there times when we should understand the Bible literally? Of course! But, should we really interpret the Bible “literally” in every instance? Of course not.”
You’re right about this.
I think many Christians say they interpret the Bible literally as a response to the liberals who repeatedly assert with great emotion and minimal intellect that they never take it literally.
That wouldn’t be a smart response then.
Yes, you make a reasonable point, but only in a limited sense.
The liberal perspective leads to a belief in falsehood, in that it produces denial of Christ’s work on the cross.
That is to say, the liberal perspective leads to a belief in that which contradicts objective reality.
I get it.
You believe your interpretation of your religion is not false.
Super. Go with it. Be happy.
The rest of us can and will continue to say BS.
Your interpretation of texts written thousands of years ago is in no way considered objective reality.
The only thought process which leads the mind to a denial of Christ’s work on the cross is one inspired by a desire follow one’s own rules rather than God’s.
A straw man argument.
It isn’t that they don’t believe there must be interpretation, but that (A) The Bible is true - not a fable or myth (B) That the Bible should be read in context of the culture it was written in and this knowledge should guide interpretation. (C) When interpretation is needed it should be based upon doctrine and passages that do not need interpretation.
To say Christians believe that God has feathers because the Old Testament speaks of the Lord gathering His children as a hen gathers her chicks beneath her wings is silly to the point of blasphemy.
You can’t make up what people believe and then criticize them for it.
Pablum.
Meaningless drivel.
Have a good evening.
A majority of mainstream historians have concluded (among them mostly agnostics and atheists):
1. Christ’s disciples were immediately frightened and confused after he died.
2. Their fear and confusion suddenly changed within a few days, when they devoted themselves to a life of poverty, persecution, imprisonment, torture and death in order to preach the Good News of Christ’s blood sacrifice.
3. A significant skeptic—James—was converted.
4. A mortal enemy—Saul of Tarsus—was converted.
Historians use particular methods in determining whether or not a given event can be considered true.
In concluding what I posted in #13, the historians used the same methods they did to determine that Julius Caesar existed, and that he was a leader of Rome.
I forgot to add another conclusion of these historians—that the disciples truly believed Christ rose from the dead.
One of them, who apparently persisted in his agnostic belief system, concluded that Christ’s resurrection was a true historical event.
Nothing you’ve stated, even if 100% true, proves there is a supernatural realm, especially one where the rules and explanations you are attempting to get others to buy into, exists, in any way.
The data I reference can be found in the book by Gary Habermas, entitled something like “The Case for the Resurrection of Christ.”
Are you sure you understand what you mean by the word “supernatural?”
Don’t care.
I really don’t care at all what other people may think is true, especially unnamed, unsourced fables passed on by an anonymous person on a message board.
I care about what’s true and probable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.