Should we take the bible literally?

[polonius]

Can we believe whatever God or Jesus tells us in the Bible?

John 14:14New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

14 If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it.

COMMENT: It doesn't work. Try asking God for a winning lottery ticket.

Obviously, the Bible cannot be taken literally.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 18 by Justin108]


LITERAL AND NON LITERAL: Definitions

That which is non-literal is that is NOT literal. Literal would be taking words at their usual or most basic, primary and/or absolute sense without allowance for metaphor, exaggeration, hyperbole, similie or symbolism.

Non-literal would be to apply any or all of the above to a word, expression or passage.

To illustrate: Imagine the following scenerio. A teacher gets angry with her unruly students and shouts "I've had enough - everybody out!". Does she mean everybody is to leave the room including herself? Does she mean everybody in existence on the planet? What if the Headmaster of the school was in the class with her at the time of the command. Would he turn and obediently file out with the students? Although the word "everybody" would at its most basic level mean every human, ie all individuals, "everybody" in this instance actually is relative, she means every student in the room, rather than every living human. The word "everybody" was therefore not to be taken "literally" but being relative.

"anything" NOT the absolute sense
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 077#809077



RELATED POSTS

What does Literal / Non-literal mean ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 19#p868419

How can you determine which parts of the bible are to be taken fictional?
viewtopic.php?p=1076525#p1076525

How does one determine what is or is not literal?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 95#p890395

Did Jesus ever use hyperbole?
viewtopic.php?p=1056274#p1056274

Are Jehovah's Witnesses "biblical listeralists"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 28#p868428

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , HERMENEUTICS* and ... BIBLICAL LITERALISM

* bible interpretation

[polonius]

http://www.bloggingtheologically.com/20 ... the-cults/

“…The Mormons teach that the Bible is correct only so far as it is correctly translated. It is basically trustworthy according to them. It is the only one of the four standard works (Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price) and is not considered infallible. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God but only in so far as they use their own translation (New World Translation) as the basis of their belief in inerrancy.1

Footnote 1. Matt Slick,“Terminology of Mormon and Jehovah’s Witnesses� ↵

2. The Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry (CARM) is a Protestant apologetics organization in the United States founded in 1995. The president of the organization is Matthew J. Slick, who alongside as many as thirty staff members contribute to the CARM website.

3. Matt Slick is President and Founder of the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. Matt earned his Bachelors degree in Social Science from Concordia University, Irvine, CA, in 1988. He earned his Masters of Divinity degree from Westminster Theological Seminary in Escondido, CA, in 1991. He now resides in the Boise, Idaho, area with his family. He is ordained. Matt started CARM in October of 1995 to respond to the many false teachings of the cults on the Internet.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 22 by polonius.advice]

Did you have a question for me or one of Jehovah's Witnesses? If so, feel free to ask it.

JEHOVAHS WITNESS

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 18 by Justin108]

Okay. That which is non-literal is that is not literal. Literal would be taking words at their usual or most basic, primary or absolute sense without allowance for metaphor, exaggeration, hyperbole, similie, symbolism.

Non-literal would be to apply any or all of the above to a word, expression or passage.


"anything" NOT the absolute sense
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 077#809077

Again... you are telling me what it doesn't mean. I am asking what it does mean. What message does John 14:14 want to communicate? I don't want to know what John 14:14 doesn't say. I want to know what it does say.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 13 by Justin108]

Healing of every sort of injury, birth defect and illness is coming. (Isaiah 35:6) Those prayers will be answered when Jesus rules the Earth. Even death will be reversed. (Rev 21:4) Yet for now, God is letting these last days play out to see how we respond.

Remember Job? We have a choice curse to God and die or do we look to Him for hope and relief from all these things? Remember Satan said of mankind, "Satan answered Jehovah: “Skin for skin. A man will give everything that he has for his life. But, for a change, stretch out your hand and strike his bone and flesh, and he will surely curse you to your very face. Then Jehovah said to Satan: “Look! He is in your hand! Only do not take his life!� So Satan went out from the presence of Jehovah and struck Job with painful boils from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head. And Job took a piece of broken pottery to scrape himself, and he was sitting among the ashes."

So now that we are neck deep in Satan's controlled world, how do we face this challenge? Quickly forget all the good God has done for us and curse God for Satan's work? Or curse Satan for his work looking forward to the day of relief? I have my answer.

[polonius]

[Replying to post 22 by polonius.advice]

Did you have a question for me or one of Jehovah's Witnesses? If so, feel free to ask it.

JEHOVAHS WITNESS

QUESTION: Do Jehovah Witnesses believe that the Bible contains inerrant but not really literal teaching?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism

"Biblical literalism is the theological view that the contents of the Bible should be seen as literally true and "inerrant." The text is not to be interpreted as allegory, literature, or mythology, and is without fault in its claims; unimpeachably true in all matters."

[JehovahsWitness]

"Biblical literalism is the theological view that the contents of the Bible should be seen as literally true and "inerrant." The text is not to be interpreted as allegory, literature, or mythology, and is without fault in its claims; unimpeachably true in all matters."
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism

QUESTION: Are Jehovah's Witnesses "biblical listeralists"?

Based on the above definition I would say that would depend.

[1] "Biblical literalism is the theological view that the contents of the Bible should be seen as literally true and 'inerrant' "

The above is somewhat ambiguous. Does "literally true" mean "absolutely true" as in "totally (100%) truthful" (ie does the word literally apply to the word "true") or does it mean that the contents of the bible must be read in their literal sense and if this is done then said content is true. Yes to the former, no to the later. As for the bible being "inerrant", does that mean that there are no errors contained in it in its present form or that it originated without errors but with copying subsequently contain a number of errors? No to the former, yes to the later.

[2] The text is not to be interpreted as allegory, literature, or mythology,

If by "the text" one is refering to the contents of the entire 66 books of the bible I would say that is correct; Jehovah's Witnesses to not believe that all the verses in the bible should be taken to be "allegory" or "mythology". Indeed we believe much of the bible refers to historical fact or reality. However the bible CONTAINS "allegory".

ALLEGORY: a story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one. Synonymes : parable, analogy, metaphor, symbol, emblem;

For example, many of us are familiar with the parable of "The Good Samaritan". We (JWs) do not belive that this really happened or that the Samaritan in question was a historical figure, we think that Jesus was pronouncing a parable (a fictional story to teach a moral principle. We don't believe Jesus himself however was allegorical, we hold him to be a literal historical figure. So the JWs position is that one can interpret certain passages, persons and events to be allegorical but not all.


[2] [the bible] is without fault in its claims; unimpeachably true in all matters.

This last part I can say "YES" without hesitation we do believe the bible to be "unimpeachably true in all matters".

CONCLUSION: Based on the above definition I cannot say if we are "biblical literalist" since the definition is somewhat of a "mixed bag" of criteria. If to "qualify" we have to meet all the criteria then no we are not. If by believing any element therein we are classified as "biblical literalists" then yes we are. Anyway, JWs believe the bible is the Word of God, the final authority in all matters of faith, and that it is truthful in all expressions whether they be metaphoric or literal.

Hope that helps a little,

JW

RELATED POSTS

What does Literal / Non-literal mean ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 19#p868419

Biblical Inerrancy
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 83#p852183

Not LITERALLY "anything" in the absolute sense [Mat 21:22]
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 77#p809077


144,000

Why do Jehovah's Witnesses take the number 144,000 to be literal but not other features of this group mentioned in Rev 14:1?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 66#p825066

Do Jehovah's Witnesses take ALL NUMBERS in the by literally? [this post]
viewtopic.php?p=1047775#p1047775

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , HERMENEUTICS* and ... BIBLICAL LITERALISM

* bible interpretation

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 18 by Justin108]

Okay. That which is non-literal is that is not literal. Literal would be taking words at their usual or most basic, primary or absolute sense without allowance for metaphor, exaggeration, hyperbole, similie, symbolism.

Non-literal would be to apply any or all of the above to a word, expression or passage.


"anything" NOT the absolute sense
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 077#809077

Again... you are telling me what it doesn't mean. I am asking what it does mean. What message does John 14:14 want to communicate? I don't want to know what John 14:14 doesn't say. I want to know what it does say.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 18 by Justin108]

Okay. That which is non-literal is that is not literal. Literal would be taking words at their usual or most basic, primary or absolute sense without allowance for metaphor, exaggeration, hyperbole, similie, symbolism.

Non-literal would be to apply any or all of the above to a word, expression or passage.


"anything" NOT the absolute sense
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 077#809077

Again... you are telling me what it doesn't mean. I am asking what it does mean. What message does John 14:14 want to communicate? I don't want to know what John 14:14 doesn't say. I want to know what it does say.

King James Bible JOHN 14:14
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

QUESTION: What does John 14:14 mean?

Jesus is speaking on the last night of his life to his disciples. He tells them that they can ask for "anything" within reason, "anything" that harmonizes with God's will and he (Jesus) in his elevated position will guarantee that their prayers get answered (1 John 5:14).

This is significant because requests in Jesus' name were not part of the temple based Mosaic law system, as Jews, prayers were to be offered "directly" to God by merit of their recognition of God's special relationship with the Jews. But Jesus was indicating there would be a change in the way the faithful would worship with himself (Jesus) acting as a mediator between God and man. Jesus was telling his disciiples that he (Jesus) would play a central role in the fulfillment of God's purpose for his people and that the faithful as of that night could benefit from their special relationship with him (Jesus) by prayer or making requests "in his [Jesus'] name".



Daniel Prayed: Prayers in pre-Christian times
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 633#864633

John 14:14 "ask" or "ask me"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 055#864055

[Justin108]

QUESTION: What does John 14:14 mean?

Jesus is speaking on the last night of his life to his disciples. He tells them that they can ask for "anything" within reason, "anything" that harmonizes with God's will and he (Jesus) in his elevated position will guarantee that their prayers get answered (1 John 5:14).

Do you consider praying for the life of your dying child as something "within reason"? Would you consider an amputee who prays for his limbs to regenerate to be "within reason"? If not, why not?