Posted on 05/23/2006 1:33:18 PM PDT by freedomdefender
Better than one in four Americans believe that the Bible is "literally true and the actual word of God," the Gallup organization reported this afternoon.
A Gallup poll taken this month gave 1,002 respondents three choices: The Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word; the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it should be taken literally; or the Bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man.
The number of those backing the "literal" view was 28%, with 49% selecting the "inspired word of God" option and 19% the "fables" view.
Not surprisingly, the number of literalists rose somewhat with age, and the highest number live in the South.
By party affiliation, backing the literal word of God view, it broke down as 33% of Republicans, 26% of Democrats and 24% of Independents.
There has been a gradual decline in recent decades of those who believe that the Bible is literally true, but only by a few percentage points.
"No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father." John 6:46
"'If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.' Philip said, 'Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.' Jesus answered: 'Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?'" John 14:7-9
I'm not playing, thanks.
It's worth considering, don't you think?
Thanks--I reread it last week. I'm moving through the Psalms just now.
To me, that is absolutely one of the most beautiful, powerful and personally meaningful Psalms.
The promises made are magnificent and indescribably reassuring.
Er .... some would call it a 'joke' (soft 'j'), and it was not at your expense. I find your hostile reaction quite odd.
Yours is one of the most bizarre set of posts I've ever encountered on FR. You admit now it was a 'joke,' which is what I speculated. To say that it was not at my expense is nonsense, since you directed it to me. Now you claim I am "hostile," oddly.
I was merely wary of you and your intentions, and so I told you I'm not interested in interacting with you. That decision's soundness certainly is validated by your latest post.
I wish you the very best, in every way--just not at my expense.
yes it is
The Bible states Jesus was the only 'begotten' Son...Does this imply there were other sons that were not begotten??? Are the created angels sons of God???
Don't worry so much about understanding...The Holy Spirit will take care of that...The problem is belief...Just believe what you read...
Yo egomaniac. It's not all about you. I made a joke quoting a quote from your post. Who could guess you were a humorless sop? You're a new kind of clueless in my experience.
I'm not offended. I do think literalists are destroying the Christian faith. I would like to know if you think Maccabbees deserves to be canonized or not, but I'd guess you're a protestant and do not think so. If so, I'd have to violently disagree with your assessment that the books of Maccabbees are poorly translated, unreliable, or that councils responsible for canonizing books rejected them.
In one place the Bible refers to God as having wings and feathers. Clearly this, when read in context, was intended figuratively Oh really? Have you ever considered that humans were created in the image and likeness of God, with wings and feathers, in order to blend in with the unsuspecting avian descendents of the dinosaurs, and then evolved into our present form?
107 posted on 05/23/2006 3:54:44 PM PDT by JohnnyZ (Happy New Year! Breed like dogs!)
I responded, "To say that it was not at my expense is nonsense, since you directed it to me."
You then posted:
Yo egomaniac. It's not all about you...Who could guess you were a humorless sop? You're a new kind of clueless in my experience.
I have now made it perfectly clear twice that I would like you to leave me alone. This is my third request: LEAVE ME ALONE. If I am indeed a humorless egomaniac clueless sop as you declared, why would a rational nonbelligerent, if such you are, bother further with me?
LOLOL! It is certainly possible.
You really are obsessive.
Bookmark
I was driving out in the oil patch the other day and an radio preacher --- a firebreathing fundamentalist, if I ever heard one --- called such overly-literal interpretations "wooden."
He used the example of when Christ tells you not to invite your family or rich people over for dinner, only the poor ---- obviously, Christ wasn't talking about "no family reunions." He was talking about motivations and rewards.
Christ himself expressly says --- right after the parable of the seeds, which is the ONLY PARABLE EXPLAINED by Christ in the Bible --- that he intentionally spoke in parables, so that those not under the influence of the Holy Spirit would not understand.
Here (Mark 10):
"When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12so that,
" 'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'[a]""
Now that's a silly position. Either they misread the question or they're kind of ignorant about it. There are multiple passages in the Bible that are definitely not literal. Perhaps they should have restricted it to certain passages since what they're probably trying to get at is Creation.
That's sort of good news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.