If I Only Had a Brain

[laptoppop]

OK, I'm trying to be playful with the title as I address a "straw man" argument that I see around here fairly often.

It concerns the use of the term "literalist" -- which is a made up term used to describe (belittle?) people who supposedly take the entire Bible literally.

The truth is that there are very very very very very few people that would fit that description. Certainly most YECs would NOT fit that description.

I strongly prefer the term conservative as the way to describe the typical YEC way of understanding the Scriptures. Specifically, I do NOT interpret the entire Bible literally. I recognize that the Bible contains poetry, allegory, word pictures, imagery, songs, parables, etc. that do not get interpreted literally.

However, I do take a conservative position. If the passage identifies itself as historical, I believe it is. If a part of scripture is attributed to a particular author, I believe they did write it (under inspiration).

I also believe the Bible to be completely wholly true. It is not a science book, but when it speaks of events with scientific impact, it is true. It also uses common phrases to describe things (like the sun rising and setting) just as I do.

The Bible has many things which show the fingerprints of God through its pages. The medicine in the Law, for example, does not resemble anything like the cultures of the day. The Hebrews were called to be solidly monotheistic in the midst of various polytheistic cultures around them. (Hear O Israel!) In order for us to be sure that God was speaking through men, we have both miracles (how would you like to be a prophet of Baal going up against Elijah?) and prophecies (Jesus, the Messiah, born of a Virgin in Bethlehem, coming to pay our debt Himself).

Yes, I believe Genesis to be historical. I believe Adam and Eve and Seth and Cain, etc. to be real people. I believe the unbroken line of geneaologies are meant to portray the historicity. I believe God emphasized the morning and evening of the creation weekdays so that we would understand them as 24 hour days. I believe God made our space-time in 6 days and rested on the 7th as an example to us of the Sabbath. I do not believe observing the Sabbath is a commandment for Christians -- it was made for us, not we for it -- but it sure is good to take a day off once in a while and chill out and enjoy my family and my Lord.

I am not a literalist - I am a person who interprets the Bible conservatively.

 

[shernren]

But it is still a literalist interpretation of Genesis 1-11, is it not?

 

[pgp_protector]

I don't think conservative would work.

I think of myself as a conservative , but fall more in the TE boat.

 

[jeffweeder]

You have a good brain laptoppop and your interpretation of scripture is how it should be.---from what ive read.

Its others here that have a problem with it not you---God bless you, and now I shall duck for cover.

Didnt Jesus say that he who does not accept the kingdom as a little child, wont enter it?

I believe a little child would interpret things as they are written, in its simple way.

 

[Xaero]

I believe a little child would interpret things as they are written, in its simple way.

As a little child i thought revelations is literal

 

[Dannager]

I think that it's understood that the normal use of the term "listeralist" in these discussions applies to someone who interprets the Genesis account, specifically, literally. While there are many Christians out there who take the whole Bible completely literally (and are proud of it!), this discussion really doesn't pertain as much to the rest of the Bible. Genesis is the distinction, and the term "conservative" has a little too much baggage attached to it already. Literalist is both accurate and widely-used in the arena we hold these discussions in.

 

[Dannager]

You have a good brain laptoppop and your interpretation of scripture is how it should be.---from what ive read.

Its others here that have a problem with it not you---God bless you, and now I shall duck for cover.

He has a problem with evolution, so I think that people having a problem with other positions is pretty universal, here.

Didnt Jesus say that he who does not accept the kingdom as a little child, wont enter it?

I believe a little child would interpret things as they are written, in its simple way.

No little child is capable of understanding the weighty issues of the Bible. Some perhaps, but not anywhere near all. The passage you're referring to talks about accepting God's kingdom, not the Bible. Please try to develop working theology.

 

[Assyrian]

We don't see too many hyper literalists here who take every word of the bible literally. We do have people bound by this exegetical rule that unless the passage says it is a parable or it is given in the form of 'the kingdom of God is like...' then it has to be interpreted literally. We see this in busterdogs insistance on the surface text and vossler's signature:

David Cooper: "When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense;therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, literal meaning, unless the facts of the context indicate clearly otherwise."

They insist that this the proper way to interpret the bible, the proper way to interpret Genesis, in
spite of the fact that they simply don't stick to the rule anywhere else in scripture. I find most YECs quite good at recognising the rich tapestry of poetry and metaphor in the bible, everywhere but Genesis. In Genesis a dogmatic hyperliteralism kicks in.

You may insist on Adam and Eve being literal because of the genealogies. That is not a problem with TE, many TEs believe in a literal Adam and Eve. But if you have details in the story like the snake, which is described as a plain literal snake throughout Gen 3, but turns out when we read the rest of the bible to actually be about Satan, how can you insist that other details like Adam being made from clay, are absolutely literal, when this is itself a very common biblical metaphor?

YECs insist the days of Genesis 1 have to be taken literally, even though Moses himself didn't take God's days literally in a Psalm about the creation. Any other topic in scripture and YECs would be insisting on this as utter proof we are dealing with metaphor. We have the word day used in three or four different ways in the first two chapters of Genesis, again any other topic in scripture and you would have YECs pointing out all the different ways a word is used in a passage.

YECs are highly creative in looking for alternative meanings of passages that cause difficulties with either science (geocentrism) or other passages of scripture (different order of creation in Gen 1 & 2). Yet they are adamant on only one possible meaning to the days in Gen 1.

How is it that good competent bible scholars suddenly turn Manchurian Candidate literalists with the trigger word 'evolution'?

 

[Xaero]

They insist that this the proper way to interpret the bible, the proper way to interpret Genesis, in
spite of the fact that they simply don't stick to the rule anywhere else in scripture. I find most YECs quite good at recognising the rich tapestry of poetry and metaphor in the bible, everywhere but Genesis. In Genesis a dogmatic hyperliteralism kicks in.

It's funny how they insist on a plain easy, "even a child can understand" literal meaning of Genesis, but they must write huge pamphlets to consolidate their view.

 

[Assyrian]

But I should point out that

If I Only Had a Brain

is a completely inappropriate title from as intelligent, and big hearted, a member as laptoppop.

 

[crawfish]

I, for one, appreciate your candor.

There is really a fine line between "TE" and "creationist". The opinions here are spread along a pretty wide range, from complete literalism to complete allegory. Most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

I find this topic important because it has affected the faith of people close to me. They see the evidence and question if the Bible can be valid in the face of that evidence, based on what they have been taught. I feel it is my responsibility to show them another way...I read and post here to expand and hone my beliefs.

However, you are all my brothers and sisters in Christ, and I love each and every one of you.