Bible Question:
Dear Forum Members, An interesting question has arisen on the forum recently in multiple posts, which I would like to address directly. We would all agree that it is possible to interpret one part of scripture figuratively and another literally. The question is, "What are the criteria that can be consistently applied to tell the difference?" This is something that creeps into many different threads. It impacts how we interpret the creation story in Genesis, and the end of the world in Revelation. It even affects whether we believe that there was a certain number of soldiers, years, etc, or whether those numbers are figurative to mean something else. |
Bible Answer: Sir Pent The Bible must be taken literally unless the text itself shows it is speaking figuratively by using metaphors, allegories and other such figures of speech. Or unless a literal interpretation would violate common sense or contradicts scripture in other places. One of the biggest problems I see in scripture interpretation today is we are too quick to apply our ideas to the scripture rather than studying to find the real meaning. Many times this results in a surface or feasible explanation but at the cost of the actual or more in-depth meaning. Also many men rather than study on their own will repeat other men’s teachings on the passage. By doing this, errors are often repeated. I think this is one of the reasons we have so many people quoting and holding to promises made only to Israel. It sounded good and they never looked to see what it meant in context. |