A Case for Not Reading The Bible Literally

[ScooterJackson]

You keep saying annihilationists are calling Jesus a liar.
They would say exactly the opposite.

Of course they lie about it. That's what they are doing and some aren't even aware that they have been deceived while others are aware they are claiming Jesus did not know what He was talking about on this topic.

What did Jesus mean when

The devil did this same trick with Adam and Eve saying "did God really say this?" and then he proceeds to explain "what God said" that made God out to be a liar.

That is an exegetical question, not a question that can be settled merely by assigning motives.

Jesus settled this long ago. It is carnal minded religious people calling what Jesus said in to question.

The dispute is not whether Jesus tells the truth.
The dispute is what He intended by His words.

Yep, that's the devil's little jedi mind trick he uses to preface deception
It's like a primer he uses to prepare people to receive his deception.

Furthermore, I think there is a danger in your argument.

Yeah, the devil considers God's Word to be dangerous because it is a danger to him.

Yet the apostles reasoned from Scripture rather than immediately declaring everyone a servant of the devil.

And they recognized that not accepting what God said is something the devil seeks to get people to do.

I would rather keep asking: "What does the text say?"

I guess you'll have to wait until the future gets here to find out the answer then.
I accept what Jesus says, so I already have the answer.

 

[ZuluKono]

A Mormon calling calling himself a Christian does not make it so any more than a man calling himself a woman makes it so.

False equivalency and strawman all in one.

Un, no. There is one and only one Christian “religion”, worldwide.

There are, however, many denominations.

And you're "Uh, no" remark is super condescending.

 

[Davidstarr]

Of course they lie about it. That's what they are doing and some aren't even aware that they have been deceived while others are aware they are claiming Jesus did not know what He was talking about on this topic.



The devil did this same trick with Adam and Eve saying "did God really say this?" and then he proceeds to explain "what God said" that made God out to be a liar.



Jesus settled this long ago. It is carnal minded religious people calling what Jesus said in to question.



Yep, that's the devil's little jedi mind trick he uses to preface deception
It's like a primer he uses to prepare people to receive his deception.



Yeah, the devil considers God's Word to be dangerous because it is a danger to him.



And they recognized that not accepting what God said is something the devil seeks to get people to do.



I guess you'll have to wait until the future gets here to find out the answer then.
I accept what Jesus says, so I already have the answer.

You still have not given the biblical evidence where Jesus talks about there being eternal TORMENT.
Without that who can believe anything you say?

And no one is calling Jesus a liar.
The question is whether or not a person can UNDERSTAND what He says.
I don't think you can.

 

[OMC]

Of course they lie about it. That's what they are doing and some aren't even aware that they have been deceived while others are aware they are claiming Jesus did not know what He was talking about on this topic.



The devil did this same trick with Adam and Eve saying "did God really say this?" and then he proceeds to explain "what God said" that made God out to be a liar.



Jesus settled this long ago. It is carnal minded religious people calling what Jesus said in to question.



Yep, that's the devil's little jedi mind trick he uses to preface deception
It's like a primer he uses to prepare people to receive his deception.



Yeah, the devil considers God's Word to be dangerous because it is a danger to him.



And they recognized that not accepting what God said is something the devil seeks to get people to do.



I guess you'll have to wait until the future gets here to find out the answer then.
I accept what Jesus says, so I already have the answer.

You're proving my point.

The serpent's deception in Genesis 3 was not asking what God meant.
It was contradicting what God said: "Ye shall not surely die."
Every Christian interpretation involves asking what a text means.
We do that with Romans 9, Revelation 20, Matthew 24, and every difficult passage in Scripture.
The issue is not whether Jesus tells the truth.
The issue is whether our interpretation of His words is correct.
Simply saying, "Anyone who disagrees is deceived by Satan," does not prove your doctrine.
It bypasses the very exegetical question under debate.
If eternal conscious torment is true, then demonstrate it from the text.
Show why the annihilationist reading fails.
But accusing every opponent of calling Jesus a liar is not an argument.
The Bereans were commended because they searched the Scriptures to see whether things were so (Acts 17:11).
Examining the meaning of a text is not unbelief. It is exactly what faithful Bible study requires.

 

[Inquisitor]

how can you try to force the Gentiles to live like Jews?

Was Peter forcing the Gentiles to be under the law?

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

You must be the only Christian that has never heard of the crusades and the Inquisition.
Or about Jim Jones founder of the People's Temple in Jonestown Guyana.

No, Jim Jones was a blasphemous Christ hating, atheistic, megalomaniacal Satanist.
Atheists are liars that try to impune upon biblical Christianity what their infamous brother in arms (who is in Hell), Jim Jones did.
I always heard, "Don't drink the koolaid" when speaking about things Jesus Himself affirmed to be fact, like His creation.
I don't put up with it. He was an antichrist and his religion hated God.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

You must be the only Christian that has never heard of the crusades and the Inquisition.
Or about Jim Jones founder of the People's Temple in Jonestown Guyana.

I thought you were talking about currently.
I agree that there are posers who call themselves Christians and are not.
The Muslims are the ones who currently convert with threat of death. Ie. Sudan
If we go clear back to the Dark Ages, here's an audio book of history available prior to the Reformation.

 

[ScooterJackson]

The serpent's deception in Genesis 3 was not asking what God meant.

No, he just changes what God meant by telling them a lie and they chose to believe the devil over the Lord.

Every Christian interpretation involves asking what a text means.

Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to lead us and guide us in to all Truth to reveal to use what God means.
Some have been following a spirit that is not holy and stand in opposition to what God said.

Simply saying, "Anyone who disagrees is deceived by Satan," does not prove your doctrine.

2 John 1:9 - Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

If eternal conscious torment is true, then demonstrate it from the text.

Those in error will find out first hand when the future gets here.

This has been debated for years and no matter what anybody says those embracing this error will continue saying they don't believe Jesus knew what He was talking about so it's all a moot point. Some have to learn the hard way. So be it.

 

[ScooterJackson]

The Muslims are the ones who currently convert with threat of death. Ie. Sudan
If we go clear back to the Dark Ages, here's an audio book of history available prior to the Reformation.

Yes and those following reform theology and catholicism used to be real big in murdering people who did not embrace their doctrine.

It was reported a while back that down in Mexico some catholics had murdered some protestants who were also Mexican.
I suppose it's the reformers turn to whack somebody now.

 

[Inquisitor]

Parts that are obviously symbolic should be taken that way. Let the bible interpret it's own use of the symbols in those texts.
Like the statue in Dan 2 or the beasts rising out of the sea in Dan 7 and Rev 13.

Others (like historical accounts) should be taken literally as things that actually happened.
The creation and fall were literal events. The Great Flood, etc.

There will always be some indication in the text if it means something literal or symbolic.
Nothing in the creation story hints at anything other than a literal account.

Genesis 3:1
Now the serpent was more cunning than any animal of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman,
“Has God really said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?”

Was Satan a literal snake?

Revelation 12:9
The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray.
He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

 

[Davidstarr]

Genesis 3:1
Now the serpent was more cunning than any animal of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman,
“Has God really said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?”

Was Satan a literal snake?

Revelation 12:9
The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray.
He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

You don't think Satan can speak through a serpent?
Ever hear of possession?

Take into consideration that all snakes are deaf. They have no audio receptors.
So how could he have an intelligent conversation with Eve?
Obviously he was one of the beasts of the field created by God.
Yet even more obvious Satan was speaking through him to talk to Eve.

 

[Inquisitor]

You must be the only Christian that has never heard of the crusades and the Inquisition.
Or about Jim Jones founder of the People's Temple in Jonestown Guyana.

You can add the following so called Christian denomination to the list.

David Koresh (born Vernon Wayne Howell) was the leader of the Branch Davidians, a millennial Christian sect and radical offshoot of the Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) Church. [1, 2]
He was the central figure in the Waco siege, a infamous 51-day standoff with federal law enforcement that took place in early 1993 at the Mount Carmel Center compound near Waco, Texas. [1, 2]

The Standoff and Its End

• • The Conflict: The standoff began on February 28, 1993, when the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) attempted to execute a search warrant at the compound for suspected stockpiling of illegal weapons. A heavy gun battle ensued, resulting in the deaths of four federal agents and six Branch Davidians. [1, 2, 3]
  • The Fiery Conclusion: The FBI took over the siege, which lasted until April 19, 1993. On that day, federal agents launched a gas and tank assault to force the members out. During the operation, a massive fire broke out and engulfed the compound, resulting in the deaths of 76 people inside, including Koresh and 25 children. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
  • The Deaths: Official government investigations, including the Danforth Report, concluded that the Branch Davidians set the fires themselves as part of a mass suicide pact. Autopsies revealed that Koresh died from a gunshot wound to the forehead, which investigators concluded was a fatal shot delivered by his top lieutenant, Steve Schneider, who then turned the gun on himself

 

[Inquisitor]

You don't think Satan can speak through a serpent?
Ever hear of possession?

Take into consideration that all snakes are deaf. They have no audio receptors.
So how could he have an intelligent conversation with Eve?
Obviously he was one of the beasts of the field created by God.
Yet even more obvious Satan was speaking through him to talk to Eve.

Was Satan a snake or not?

Was the snake an allegory?

 

[ZuluKono]

You don't think Satan can speak through a serpent?
Ever hear of possession?

You're grasping at straws, and it's pathetic.

 

[ZuluKono]

Obviously he was one of the beasts of the field created by God.

You're "obviously" wrong.

It reads:
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.

It does not read:
Now the serpent was more subtil than any other beast of the field which the LORD God had made.

The difference between those two sentences is night and day. This isn't even about literal vs figurative, it's about basic reading comprehension.

 

[Dino246]

False equivalency and strawman all in one.

Ah... you're familiar with fallacies. Good. Do you think Mormons are Christians? If so, you have bigger problems. If not, then please explain why you think two cases of calling things what they aren't is a false equivalency and a strawman argument.

And you're "Uh, no" remark is super condescending.

Well, it's a while since anyone called me "super" anything, but I'll take that whence it comes.

 

[Dino246]

You're grasping at straws, and it's pathetic.

And you call my words "super condescending".

 

[GaryA]

While James is arguing is there if no fruit of work, then the salvation is fake, dead.

It is not talking about a dead or fake salvation; rather, it is talking about faith being dead - not non-existent - but, dead - not a 'living' faith - not a 'productive' faith.

James 2:17 is not talking about salvation - nor the loss of it - it is talking about faith - [real] actual [existent] faith - but, that is 'dead' (not 'effective') because of a lack of works.

It is not [about] a state-and-condition of salvation; rather, it is [about] a state-and-condition of faith.

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

Truth be told; I don't think the lake of fire is literal. I think it is allegorical. And does not exist yet.
Rev 20 shows fire comes out of heaven to destroy the wicked, and also this entire world is reduced to ashes.
This does not happen until after the 1,000 years of Rev 20.
Picture looking at an entire burning planet from a distance out in space.
It would appear to be a huge lake of fire covering the entire world.
The symbolic imagery of throwing people into this lake of fire is actually the lake of fire being thrown upon the wicked.

I was once taken to some place in hell.It was a place of dark hot caverns and a voice told me to run, and I could sense a presence chasing me like it was toying with me.The presence was satan and a bunch of different types of creature demons.Most of them were small.A voice told me to call out to Jesus but I didn't want to,which I did end up doing eventually.He announced his presence with scripture and music first, and that alone sent some of the demons fleeing.They were all scared including satan.Then a tiny bright light the size of a pin hole appeared which sent more of the demons fleeing and satan was getting angry at them and he threaten to throw them into the fire if they flee.All of them tried to put on their best brave face but you could see the fear on their face.I even joked at one who was holding onto satans leg for dear life.he looked at me and tried his best to put on a angry,brave face.As the light got bigger more of them took off till he appeared in the light itself.I could see the silhouette of him in the light and when that happen,satan and his minions got blown away into the caverns like a strong wind.Like comical fast.
before Jesus took me out of there I could hear satan yelling to gather up all the ones who didn't stand their ground, and throw them into the fire.

I'm sure it was a place in hell but I didn't see anyone there but Jesus,satan and a bunch of demons.

 

[GaryA]

Passages in Genesis, Psalms, and Job describe a flat Earth surrounded by a solid dome (firmament) holding back upper waters, with celestial bodies set directly into that dome. Apologists struggle over whether to read this as a non-literal "phenomenological view" (how the sky looks to a human observer) or as ancient mythological science that the text actually assumed.

Genesis 1 tells us that God created a literal 'firmament' - it is not 'figurative' in any way whatsoever - it is an actual literal part of the actual literal creation - just as much as the waters and the dry land. And, while some may want to interpret "how the sky looks to a human observer" (or some such thing) into it - the fact remains that the 'firmament' [itself] is a real and literal part of the physical nature of the creation. And, the particular manner of the description of the physical nature of it is literal. For example, when it refers to the "lights of heaven" being in the firmament - this is literal - fowl fly "in the open firmament" - this is literal.

'the evening and the morning' - literal
sun, moon, stars - literal
where He put them - literal
all of the various plants - literal
all of the various creatures - literal
man (male and female) - literal

Every bit of the creation description in Genesis 1 is literal - what God did - how He "formed" the heaven and earth that He created. It is a direct straight-forward detailed description of the literal physical nature of what God created. No part of it is figurative in any way.

This is one place where the Bible most definitely needs to be read as 'literal' - because it is - there are no language clues to the contrary.

It is not my intent to turn this into a flat-earth thread (So, let us not do that - okay?) - my intent is to point out that the description in Genesis 1 is unmistakably literal with regard to the details given concerning the creation that God wrought.

BTW - the 'firmament' (as described in the Bible) is not the dome; rather, it is the space below/underneath it.