Interpretation of the Bible?

one_raven

one_raven

God is a Chinese Whisper
Valued Senior Member
Where Christians always confuse me is their stance on whether the Bible should be taken as literal or it should be interpreted.

It seems like they chose either/or (depending on when it is convenient).

The story of Adam and Eve are proof of Creationism...
They are searching for Noah's Arc and the "Real" Mt Sinai...
They search for any trace of evidence that an historical Jesus ever existed (for which we have found non, by the way)...
They look for evidence of the great flood...
They search for correlation of historical events and the story of the plagues on Egypt...

But when something completely unbelievable is spelled out in the Bible, we are told that ALL the stories should not be taken literally.
The Tower of Babel.
The Sun standing still.
The story of the serpent and the forbidden fruit.
(of course, SOME Christians think everything in the Bible should be taken literally :rolleyes:)

To the ones who have SOME sense:

Who decides which stories are truth and which are fables designed to teach a lesson?
Did the Christians get teachers version that I am not aware of?
A version that has the answers in the margins written in red ink?

If every story in the Bible is not meant to be literal truth, how do you decide which ones are?
How do you know if ANY of it is?
 
Are you aware of any religious had-book that doesn’t require interpretation?
Even the works of Michelangelo required interpretation to now days. No so much
towards their understanding to now-days, but in wonder of what the hell they were
talking about back in ancient times!
:rolleyes:
 
i dont think there is a list of what events should be taken literally and what should interpreted metaphorically... its an open case basically... most ppl use either one to support watevah they're sayinn.. there is no standard interpretation as far as i knoww.. im not aware if the RCC standardizes anything in the bible... if they do, id like someone to point out some links regardin em...
 
New Advent, for all your Catholic needs

Try New Advent for all your Catholic-related informational needs. (The search engine has nothing to do with the Ave Maria Singles Club; I had to blink twice the first time I saw it, and they've never changed that part of the layout.)

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:
 
Originally posted by Persol
But people don't base their life on Michelangelo.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is correct!
People base their lives in faith, which is a sort of dependency in an unlimited world of interpretations.
:m:
 
Well its hard to determine whats what. They should never have changed the bible. Now its become like a chinese whisper, who knows how it started out?
I'll give you an example on how christians misinterprett the bible. The "great flood" may very well have happened, but is it possible some guy rounded up 2 of every animal on earth and stuffed them into a boat? Of course not, thats absolutely ridiculous, its physically impossible. What might of happened is hard to say. Perhaps the great flood killed most people and animals but left just enough to be able to rebuild. Maybe there wasn't actually a "flood" but some other natural disaster or disease. Maybe the great flood hasn't happened yet and is rather a prophecy of something similar to come.
Everythings in the bible is put into easy to understand fables by making it out as though some guy did this or that, it makes it more relatable for the average joe. I'm saying ALL of the bible is symbolic, some is crap on account of the natural chinese whisper affect.
The new testament is about some zany guy's (not unlike any other zany guy in history) life with extreme fantastical exagerations made by people who didn't know him but liked his ideas and so elevated him to the level of a god. He was just like a cult leader. No doubt one or even some of the cult leaders that are mocked today will have books written about them in the future with insane exagerations of how great he was and how evil the people who condemmed him were.
Did I clear anything up?
*expects attacks from christians*
 
Kind of reminds me of those that use science to prove the possibility of some things in the Bible actually being possible, then turn around and refute all scientific evidence when it proves that something in the Bible could NOT have happened.

:rolleyes:

Which is it?
 
It could all be completely fictional for all I know. What I'm saying is it seems as though it was originally designed to be symbolic and if any truth is in there it would only be found when looking at it as symbolic. Completely symbolic.
There are alot of christians out there taking it on face value and they are believing stuff that was never even intended to be believed.
 
They search for any trace of evidence that an historical Jesus ever existed (for which we have found non, by the way)...
Click to expand...
Thank you!! I don't want to interupt this thread but my friend threw me out of his house the other day because (well basically this was where it started) I said that there wasn't even any proof that Jesus existed (he's catholic!) and he got really angry and started saying that 'it's fact, everyone knows that it's fact. Everyone knows that Jesus existed it's just a matter of debate as to whether he is the son of God or not.' This pissed me off because all i was doing was stating the facts. If anyone anywhere knows of any proof that Jesus Christ existed then please can you let me know! Even the Roman records did not record crucifying a Jesus around the time he was supposed to have been put to his death. I'm not saying (and i wasn't!) that Jesus didn't exist (because i think that he probably did!) I was just saying (am still am!) that there is no evidence that he did exist!
 
Originally posted by Neville
I'm not saying (and i wasn't!) that Jesus didn't exist (because i think that he probably did!) I was just saying (am still am!) that there is no evidence that he did exist!
Click to expand...

I think he probably didn't.

http://truthbeknown.com

Read her book.
I digested 400 pages in 3 days.
Couldn't out it down.
It's amazing.
 
then turn around and refute all scientific evidence when it proves that something in the Bible could NOT have happened.
Click to expand...
Give me an example...what parts of the Bible does scientific evidence disprove?
 
Originally posted by chaplaintappman22
Give me an example...what parts of the Bible does scientific evidence disprove?
Click to expand...
are you serious? Where the hell would one start?
 
Originally posted by chaplaintappman22
Give me an example...what parts of the Bible does scientific evidence disprove?
Click to expand...
The Global Flood.
The Exodus.

Which would you like to defend? I have a mild preference for debating archaeological issues but, if need be, I'll be more than happy to discuss Flood Geology. So, you tell me:
  • How old is the Earth?
  • What was the date of the Flood?
  • What was the date of the Exodus?
  • Which claim would you like to discuss?
Afterward, we can address the those Biblical claims which cannot be disproven by science because they are simply out of scope, but for which there is zero evidence, such as the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection.

Finally, we can try to determine if there exists any extra-biblical evidence for Jesus at all.

Sounds like fun! :)
 
Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
The Global Flood.
The Exodus.
but for which there is zero evidence, such as the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection.

Finally, we can try to determine if there exists any extra-biblical evidence for Jesus at all.

Sounds like fun! :)
Click to expand...

All the information above can be proofed very easily.
Three entities who can't stand each other, christians, jews, and muslims agree on adam and eve, Jesus Christ, the flood, creation of earth and heaven in six days, ect. and all the issues you mention.

Please consider that these people can not even agree on the simplest of things and would rather be stricken blind than read each other's book, so I pronounce it a miracle on it's own that three different books coming down centuries apart state the same stories and basic ideas.
 
The bible

The bible is a compilation of the jewish history, is their family tree, Constantino adobted part of it when he decided to create a new sect call cristianity and while doing that he took what he wanted and change what he did not, and burn the rest, because Israel was a tribe of nomads they did not have a very solid history but they where well known for their powerful and devastating battles remember their main god was the god of war Yawhe, later cristianity turn him into the god we know now kind of make him more softer. When the israelies finally found their promise land (not without a fight) they needed a history like the other civilizations so they took everything they knew about acient history and made their own accounts, if you notice is not that the bible is not true is just that has been modified so many times by people wanting to rule that all that was true has been changed toward one purpose, one god, in the begining people did not believe in one god but many, In order for Constantino to make his sect real and only one he found a mesiah in the name of jesus now jesus and the new testament is not acepted by the jews. And why not? because the jesus they know in their history is far away with the cristian version to the point that the only description about jesus as a mere human was taken out of the first bible by King James.
 
The Quran talks about Jesus (Isa elmessiah), the virgin birth, his life, ect... The Quran came into being independantly from the bible 1500 years ago when King James was not even a twinckle in his grandmother eye..So I consider this a proof that two independant sources match.

Few of the Quranic verses:
[2.253] We have made some of these apostles to excel the others among them are they to whom Allah spoke, and some of them He exalted by (many degrees of) rank; and We gave clear miracles to Isa son of Marium, and strengthened him with the holy spirit. And if Allah had pleased, those after them would not have fought one with another after clear arguments had come to them, but they disagreed; so there were some of them who believed and others who denied; and if Allah had pleased they would not have fought one with another, but Allah brings about what He intends.
The Family of Imran
[3.45] When the angels said: O Marium, surely Allah gives you good news with a Word from Him (of one) whose name is the '. Messiah, Isa son of Marium, worthy of regard in this world and the hereafter and of those who are made near (to Allah).
[3.52] But when Isa perceived unbelief on their part, he said Who will be my helpers in Allah's way? The disciples said: We are helpers (in the way) of Allah: We believe in Allah and bear witness that we are submitting ones.
[3.55] And when Allah said: O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so l will decide between you concerning that in which you differed.
[3.59] Surely the likeness of Isa is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, Be, and he was.
[3.84] Say: We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top