How do you interpret the Bible?

I know since this is GS, a lot probably will answer "as complete fiction." But I'm curious as to the other opinions of the more theistic users...how do you interpret the Bible? Do you interpret it literally or more symbolically? I go with the latter, as I take passages like creation, Noah's Ark, and The Tower of Babel more as allegory than it's literal translation. What about you?

I don't think anyone takes the Bible word for word literally anymore.

Historical criticism is an approach I quite like.

I don't think anyone takes the Bible word for word literally anymore.

Pikdum

Well, these days theists don't want to take the bible literally anymore, or else then they'd have to accept the fact of what a horrible, deranged, sadistic creature there god is. As well as his followers were in the old days. They decide to make up excuses for it left, right and centre.

The precursor to Cautionary Tales for Children that adults take way too seriously.

It was a good read. Plenty of action and nice battle scenes.

Lord of the Rings was better though.

[QUOTE="Pikdum"]

I don't think anyone takes the Bible word for word literally anymore.

metroidprime55

I've read the entire Bible, and in all honesty I find that soooo many people bs it or mis-read it for the sake of their own good.ShadowsDemon

I've read the entire Bible, and in all honesty I find that soooo many people bs it or mis-read it for the sake of their own good.ShadowsDemon

I take the bible allegorically mainly, except for laws and decrees. I see no allegory in stuff like thou shalt not kill. I am a Christian btw.

Historical criticism is an approach I quite like.

Jazz_Fan

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]I've read the entire Bible, and in all honesty I find that soooo many people bs it or mis-read it for the sake of their own good.chaoscougar1

like every single branch of every Abrahamic religion has done?

I've read the entire Bible, and in all honesty I find that soooo many people bs it or mis-read it for the sake of their own good.ShadowsDemon

The authors believed that what they were stating was true and I make it my effort to understand the text in the way that the author intended.

That stated, I take genre into account when I interpret the Scriptures. A proverb is to be understood as a proverb. A historical statement is to be understood as a historical statement. A poem is to have poetic imagery. You get the point.

If you wish to know my own beliefs regarding the nature of biblical interpretation, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Innerancy which can be found all over the internet gives a very detailed look at the topic.

As far as whether or not I interpret the text literally, I generally do. I accept the entire narrative of Scripture as truth - that God created everything to be good, man broke itself, God made countless promises that he would restore his beloved creation, and through the atoning work of Jesus Christ everything that has been made will be remade. I hold to a literal interpretation to the notion that Jesus is the resurrected redeemer of this fallen world.

It depends on what part of the Bible. In the Old Testament, books like Genesis are clearly parables and stories that were originally written as spoofs and criticisms of other Mesopotamian and Egyptian myths of Creation. From Exodus on, the Bible begins to tell real history but from a fictional viewpoint.

I interpret it as a bunch of bulls***.

I take the bible allegorically mainly, except for laws and decrees. I see no allegory in stuff like thou shalt not kill. I am a Christian btw.

sayyy-gaa

Not like that "same-sex marriage making the country weak" routine was any indication.

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]I've read the entire Bible, and in all honesty I find that soooo many people bs it or mis-read it for the sake of their own good.chaoscougar1

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"]

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]I've read the entire Bible, and in all honesty I find that soooo many people bs it or mis-read it for the sake of their own good.ShadowsDemon

If god is omnipotent couldn't he have found a better way to spread his will than through a book?

If god is omnipotent couldn't he have found a better way to spread his will than through a book?

Pikdum

[QUOTE="Pikdum"]

If god is omnipotent couldn't he have found a better way to spread his will than through a book?

NEWMAHAY

But then there's that part where he tells a guy to kill his kids and HE ACTUALLY DOES IT!

Yet we persecute people who do the same thing today.

Shame on the justice system.

It is a book of fables - poetic tales meant to convey certain teachings. Pretty much like every other holy text. That's how I see it.

a book written by the worlds first troll

I interpret it through the tradition of the church which is complex and cannot be simply stated one way or the other via Literal or metaphorical.

It is a book of fables - poetic tales meant to convey certain teachings. Pretty much like every other holy text. That's how I see it.

worlock77

That only works for some books of the Old testament, it doesn't work for the gospels, acts or even the Torah.

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="chaoscougar1"] So what you're saying is that people interpret it differently to you
? Like what every single branch of Christianity has done?
Ah, so wisechaoscougar1

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"][QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"] I didn't say that. I said some people do, which is a fact, not an opinion. So many religions view it differently and each meaning differently. That's enough proof for ya.ShadowsDemon

I'm interested in who wrote it and why. The answers are revealing and interesting. I'm now reading "Who Wrote the New Testament", by Burton S Mack amd have just finished "Some Mistakes of Moses", by Robert Green Ingersoll. That Moses book is online here:

http://ia600500.us.archive.org/11/items/somemistakesmose00ingeuoft/somemistakesmose00ingeuoft.pdf

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="chaoscougar1"] ...Proof of what?chaoscougar1

I don't think anyone takes the Bible word for word literally anymore.

Pikdum

I correlate passages with historical facts and accounts from those around at the time.

the same way I interpret Snow White

Its not literal, but considering the vast amount of different authors it is plausible that some of the less insanely "creative" stories line up with some possible history. Like Jesus was recognized as a real person, even if his miracle works and history are up for debate.

Personally I think its meant to try and instill a sense of morality and discipline in people, even if its incredibly schizophrenic and old fashioned (what with it being old as hell and being written by a bunch of different people with different views). Sadly some people use it for evil and not for good as was its original intent, which goes to show that man is the true monster here, not science or religion or guns or the internet or ghosts.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

It is a book of fables - poetic tales meant to convey certain teachings. Pretty much like every other holy text. That's how I see it.

Philokalia

That only works for some books of the Old testament, it doesn't work for the gospels, acts or even the Torah.

Sorry, but I find the idea of a man being born from a virgin woman, who could literally heal sickness, disease and defect about as believable as I find the Buddha supposedly standing up at birth and talking.

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"][QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"] :| Do I really need to spell it out to ya?ShadowsDemon

Good general rule of thumb for me is the OT is more symbolic while the NT is more literal.