Biblical literalism: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 03:55, 30 September 2006 editHome Computer (talk \| contribs)1,211 edits →Arguments for Biblical literalism: Can this please be deleted?← Previous edit		Revision as of 03:55, 30 September 2006 edit undoHome Computer (talk \| contribs)1,211 editsm →Arguments for Biblical literalism: spNext edit →
Line 35:		Line 35:

	==Arguments for Biblical literalism==		==Arguments for Biblical literalism==
	While there are no scholarly proponents of Biblical Literalism (see ]) ~~ponents~~ of biblical literalism teach the following as what Biblical Literalists would argue.		While there are no scholarly proponents of Biblical Literalism (see ]) opponents of biblical literalism teach the following as what Biblical Literalists would argue.
	{{SectOR}}		{{SectOR}}
	*If the Bible is occasionally poetic, then it is possibly poetic at any time -- even on the first verse, even on the last verse, even on every verse.		*If the Bible is occasionally poetic, then it is possibly poetic at any time -- even on the first verse, even on the last verse, even on every verse.

Revision as of 03:55, 30 September 2006

This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Misplaced Pages's deletion policy .
Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page.
Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion.

Steps to list an article for deletion: {{subst:afd}} • Preloaded debate OR {{subst:afd2|pg=Biblical literalism|cat=|text=}} • {{subst:afd3|pg=Biblical literalism}} log

Biblical literalism is a Straw man argument. People who teach against Biblical literalism teach that it is a belief that goes beyond acceptance of Biblical inerrancy . Biblical literalists regard Biblical Scriptures as literal statements of truth . This is established by comparing Scriptures such as Proverbs 30:5-6 with 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:20-21 to affirm that the Bible is flawlessly true. This is contrasted with claims that metaphorical and allegorical statements are inherently untrue at some level. It is also contrasted with claims that the numerous metaphorical and allegorical interpretations of Scriptures splinter the Bible's meaning and provide an inconsistent -- and therefore flawed -- message.

Arguments against Biblical literalism

This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Many Scriptures contradict widely accepted scientific theories. For examples, compare Biblical cosmology to astronomy, or compare Creationism to the theory of evolution, or compare Geocentrism with the "Big Bang" theory.
Biblical literalism results in its adherents...
- ...adopting cruel ethical standards that would return us to a less civilized time. (1)
  - "...it is only the relation of domestic slavery as authorized by God, that we defend." --Robert Dabney (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7)
- ..."believing that God is sadistic, brutal, vengeful, callow, cruel, and savage —a killer beyond reckoning." --Bill Moyers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9)
- ...believing that God sanctioned human sacrifices. (1, 2, and possibly 3)
- ...being tempted to perform the unthinkable. (1, 2, and 3)
- ...rejecting or harming their own family members. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8)
Many Scriptures are inconsistent with other Scriptures (or even themselves). These must require some type of abstract interpretation. Examples include:
- Does God cause confusion? Compare 1 against 2 & 3.
- Does God change his mind? Compare 1, 2, & 3 against 4, 5, & 6.
- Does God play favorites? Compare 1, 2, & 3 against 4, 5, & 6.
- Does God punish children for the sins of their parents? Compare 1 & 2 against 3, 4, & 5.
- Is God deceitful? Compare 1 & 2 against 3 & 4.

Arguments for Biblical literalism

While there are no scholarly proponents of Biblical Literalism (see Straw man) opponents of biblical literalism teach the following as what Biblical Literalists would argue.

If the Bible is occasionally poetic, then it is possibly poetic at any time -- even on the first verse, even on the last verse, even on every verse.
If the Bible is occasionally poetic, then it can be selectively interpreted to suit almost any belief or desire, and therefore loses all meaning.
Biblical literalists claim that those who view certain Biblical passages as absurd simply lack imagination or faith, and point out that, in God, all things are possible, including the supernatural. (1 and 2)
Biblical Scripture is God's inspired work and requires neither compromise with nor testimony from competing philosophies such as science, other religions, or external ethics. It is a Christian's duty to believe the "Word of God" above any perceived "wisdom of man". (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5)

Biblical pragmatism

Biblical pragmatism is a goal-oriented approach to the Bible in which only certain Scriptures are identified as worthy for belief. Individuals subscribing to this approach may pick-and-choose which Biblical Scriptures to believe (or sometimes even recognize) in order to reconcile with or legitimize pre-conceptions or desires. Inconvenient Scriptures are typically identified as poetic (or otherwise metaphorical or allegorical). Also see philosophical pragmatism.

By declaring that modern Christian denominations have rejected Scriptures studied by Jesus or his apostles (see canonical books of the Bible), some have argued that nearly all Christians practice Biblical pragmatism to meet the goals of their denomination.

Movements supported by literal interpretations of Scripture

Template:TotallyDisputed-section

References

Dabney, Robert. A Defense of Virginia and Through Her of the South. 1865. p. 99
Moyers, Bill. Speech at Union Theological Seminary on 7-Sept-2005. Reproduced at http://www.uts.columbia.edu/index.php?id=605

Misplaced Pages