Claim CH102:
The Bible should be read literally.
Source:
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master
Books, p. 204.
Response:
- A literal reading of the Bible misses the meaning behind the details
(Hyers 1983). It is like reading Aesop's Fables without trying to see
the moral of the stories. Finding the meaning in a figurative reading
requires more thought, but is thinking about the Bible a bad thing?
- There are many inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the Bible that
cannot be resolved without excessive pseudological contortions unless
one does not take them literally. Augustine said,
It is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a
Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking
nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such
an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a
Christian and laugh it to scorn (Augustine 1982, 42-43).
Augustine's warning has merit. The invalid "proofs" necessary to
support antievolution, a global flood, and a young earth, and the
contradictions implied by literalism have pushed people away from
Christianity (Hildeman 2004; Morton n.d.).
- There are several passages of the Bible itself that indicate that it
should not be taken literally:
- 2 Corinthians 3:6 says of the new covenant, "the letter kills, but
the Spirit gives life."
- 1 Corinthians 9:9-12 says that one of the laws of Moses is
figurative, not literal.
- Galatians 4:24 says that the story of Abraham is an allegory.
- Jesus frequently taught in parables, with the obvious intention that
the lesson from the story, not the details of the story, was what
was important.
- There is extensive tradition in Christianity, including Catholicism and
Protestantism, of accepting nonliteral interpretations (Rogerson
1992). Biblical literalism is not a requirement; it is a fashion.
- Reading the Bible requires consideration of the society in which and
for which it was written. The pressing issue in Israel when Genesis 1
was written was monotheism versus polytheism. Genesis 1 is written to
show that different aspects of nature -- light and dark, earth and sky,
sun, moon, and stars, plants and animals -- do not have their separate
gods but all fall under one God (Hyers 1983).
- Nobody reads the Bible entirely literally anyway. For example, when
God says, "into your hands they [all wild animals] are delivered"
(Gen. 9:2), the phrase is obviously meant metaphorically.
- Even reading the Bible literally requires interpretation. For example,
what does "fountains of the deep" (Prov. 8:28) mean?
Links:
Hyers, Conrad. 1983. Biblical literalism: Constricting the cosmic dance.
In: Is God a Creationist?, ed. R. M. Frye, 100-104, New York:
Scribner.
http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1332
References:
- Augustine, St. 1982. The Literal Meaning of Genesis, vol. 1.
Transl. by J. H. Taylor. New York: Newman Press.
http://www.holycross.edu/departments/religiousstudies/alaffey/Augustine-Genesis.htm
- Hildeman, E. J. 2004. (see below)
- Hyers, Conrad. 1983. Biblical literalism: Constricting the cosmic
dance. In: Is God a Creationist?, ed. R. M. Frye, 100-104, New
York:
Scribner. http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1332
- Morton, Glenn. n.d. Personal stories of the creation/evolution
struggle.
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/person.htm
- Rogerson, J. W. 1992. Interpretation, history of. In: The Anchor
Bible Dictionary, D. N. Freedman, ed., New York: Doubleday, vol. 3,
pp. 425-433.
Further Reading:
Hildeman, Eric J., 2004. Creationism: The Bible Says No! Bloomington,
IN: Author House.
created 2003-4-14, modified 2005-2-15