Was the Bible Meant to be Taken Literally? - Guy Consolmagno

[@Aironnes]

Nothing in science is ever proved.

[@blazejames47]

I hate how almost ALL theists believe that the bible should not be taken literally JUST BECAUSE you would be considered insane in modern society for doing so. The bible was made thousands of years ago in a time when people had low knowledge of the world and gave the death penalty for just about everything. Of COURSE they would take the bible literally, and I believe everyone who doesn't is just giving an excuse for the madness written down inside of it

[@bartholomewpmalleck844]

God is the creator of all things, the heavens and the earth (Gen. 1:1; 2 Mach. 7:28). The Scripture nowhere gives a scientific description of the origin of the world. The ancients referred to the earth as a building set on firm foundations. God raised the earth to make dry land appear.

[@jackskellington765]

How the hell do these people know that the bible isnt supposed to be taken literaly?? They werent there wen the people wrote the books and they (bible scholars/theologians/etc)...

[@bartholomewpmalleck844]

The earth is the dwelling place for man (Gen. 1:26-27). It was cursed on account of Adam's sin (Gen. 3:17-18). All creation awaits deliverance from this curse Rom. 8:19-22). At the consummation of the world, the earth shall be renewed and only the just shall henceforth dwell in it (2 Pet. 3:13; Apoc. 21:1).

[@bartholomewpmalleck844]

The earth is a flat disk surrounded by an abyss of waters, and held up by mighty pillars in the abyss (1 Kings 2:8; Ps. 23:2; 74:4; 103:5). Douay Bible, used by English-speaking Catholics. Catholics are forbidden to read (KJV) or any Bible translated or edited by non-Catholics. [See] Books, Prohibition of.

[@throwingpearls4601]

If a Jesuit is speaking, consider the possibility the opposite of what your hearing is actually the truth.

[@quemacha]

If the RC church doesn't let science get in the way of taking the Virgin Birth and Resurrection of Christ literally, why does it have a problem with taking the Genesis account of creation literally?

[@versioncity1]

Thats because science is an ongoing question and does not assume answers without some sort of evidence. You said science points to a God yet you haven't demonstrated how. You can't be serious about your 'light' quote, can you? If you read my answers to you, you would see that I have already said that I think Jesus, as a man, probably existed. It is pointless trying to 'prove' God, or Jesus as a Messiah; it can't be done. There is no evidence; it's faith based.

[@stansell1]

Jesus said, "My flesh is true food and my blood is true drink."

[@Kreadus005]

Hi. Comp Sci grad here. Its not that we view everything literally... its just that we can easily detect when something's meaning isn't clear and absolute. If the bible is meant to be taken as metaphor, simile, and wisdom... then its subjective. Its wishy washy. Its aloof. Its not precise. So its hard to draw any moral conclusions from it. People use their morality to filter the bible. That filter changes person to person, day to day.

[@mechfeeney]

In my opinion the largest flaw to his ideology is that, while science may be constantly changing, at least it is dynamic (in the sense that it is forward moving thinking) rather static and out-of-date.

[@abelovedchildofgod7383]

In my judgment it is your "science" that is ideological as far as I am concerned. The Faith is not only static in its unchanging truth but it is also ever energetic and renewal in its intelligibility as it is ever ancient, ever new and eternal in its nature.

[@l4a3e4g3]

The earth is flat!!!

[@aaronswartz4034]

Yes, the earth is flat !!!

[@hackman669]

so what rock have you been living under for the past 500 years?

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

Well, that all really depends on which sense of "prove" you assume. Science can certainly prove things in the sense that a court of law can prove someone guilty; meaning just that the weight of evidence points to one explanation as the most likely with a high level of confidence.

[@Johnwillbegone]

He's a Jesuit.

[@hackman669]

So what does he do for fun?

[@mojave19]

hackman669 Study the cosmos.

[@jackskellington765]

Most certainly didnt meet the people who wrote the damn bible. So please stop trying to interpret for yourself wat u think the bible actually means.

[@punishalltrolls]

1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.” Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...” Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...” Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.” Isaiah 45:18: “...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast...”

[@d25615]

Yes

[@onserfdez7958]

Ahab and Nebuchadnezzar, and Jeroboam and...well, please look in the archeaological data bases and see what they have discovered over the centuries. Fictional characters do not have seals and palaces and are written about by other historical people from the same eras. Please investigate, scientifically.

[@Elganko]

I really don't agree with this gentleman, he's really just playing with words when he says science doesn't prove anything, that it just describes. I'm loading the full video right now but I'm not expecting much wisdom, only a different perspective and more wordplays.

[@Tap0k]

How do you explain the Earth suddenly being round? Where's that?

[@d25615]

It's a vain imagination

[@versioncity1]

Because meaning & understanding can still be derived from it regardless if it is true or not. It's like saying why read fiction? why read poetry?

[@Eromhsa1]

This guy evidently hasn't read Genesis chapter 1 because it does NOT say the earth is "FLAT"!

[@P.H.888]

He’s not restricted to Genesis chapter 1. He knows what The Hebrew Scriptures teach & what the ancient Hebrews believed, just what he said with the firmament over the top separating the waters!

[@versioncity1]

I genuinely don't know what you mean. Tell me if I'm getting it wrong but your position seems to be - the more we discover (in science) the more we understand God as a creator - but that just seems like word play, where you are just substituting (for example) cosmology with the word God. There is no area of science that points to a God or intelligent design. Often science leads us to greater questions and more unknowns, but nothing that points to a conscious creative force.

[@versioncity1]

I'm not too sure what point your making. - Yes, of course I understand that you can believe in a God/creative force. And of course you can, if you wish, believe your life has a great purpose. But because you, or whoever, believes such, it doesn't mean its true, or mean that by holding such a belief its evidence of anything else.

[@ArtemisScribe]

The Bible is made up of two parts, the Old Testement and the New Testement. The OT is fairly similar to parts of the Jewish Torah, all of the OT was written before the birth of Christ therefore it is older than 2000 years. The oldest known versions of the books that eventually became the OT are at least 3000 years old.

[@rationalrex1914]

As an agnostic, I am so confused. The two religions, Judaism and Catholicism which had anything to do with the writing and codifying of the Bible do not take it literally. Why then do those who had nothing to do with the writing of the Bible take it literally? I do not understand this dichotomy.

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

I was shocked, though, when he called the common believer a pagan. Though I agree with most of what he meant by it, I don't think he has any authority to call their Christianity false and his true. I would argue that he's a pagan as well, in fact even more so. And by getting atheism wrong (by claiming that it requires an understanding of what the god is that's being rejected), I don't see him making too many friends on either side. Similarly in what he said about engineers, its truth regardless

[@punishalltrolls]

2011 Gallup survey: "Three in 10 Americans interpret the Bible literally, saying it is the actual word of God. That is similar to what Gallup has measured over the last two decades, but down from the 1970s and 1980s. A 49% plurality of Americans say the Bible is the inspired word of God but that it should not be taken literally, consistently the most common view in Gallup's nearly 40-year history of this question. Another 17% consider the Bible an ancient book of stories recorded by man."

[@Ryakki]

"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB) And taken literally, as the bible itself DEMANDS... it's a badly written, silly, yet insanely evil fairy tale.

[@versioncity1]

I'm not too sure what that means. But I think you could say the same of the bible or any religious text.

[@357MagnumBob]

That is, not every statement is to be taken as absolutely literal. There are literal sections (e.g. historical narrative, like Isaiah 36, prophecy, like Daniel 8:21-22, Matt 24:1-2). The reader is expected to be clever enough to figure out the difference (Matt 15:15-17). There are sections clearly not meant to be taken as absolutely literal, like Ezek 17:1-10. The text directly states "set forth an allegory and tell it to the Israelites as a parable." Not always literally, but always SERIOUSLY.

[@versioncity1]

I'm not sure I do get where your coming from. yes of course anyone can have a 'slant' on anything. What makes something viable is proof or evidence; but I don't see what that has to do with deriving meaning & purpose from something. (in terms of literature as we mentioned above)

[@chd0043]

The Bible is not to be taken as absolutely literal. It is to be taken seriously.

[@hvgriggs]

The USA uses a subset of English. The rest of the world uses the full set of English words. Spelt is indeed a correct word. In the USA, they have simplified verbs and so they use spelled. Both are right, although usage is determined by your location.

[@versioncity1]

if what is verifiable?

[@mooredesign]

The Bible isn't written as a play by play account of everything that happened. For example, you do not here about Jesus getting up in the morning and putting clothes on, brushing his hair, etc. When you say that something happened "suddenly in Genesis 4:16-17 you could be way off the mark. There is no indication of how much time had passed, etc. Evidently, God did not see a need to have every single thing that happened written down.

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

Of course. My beef is with the idea that a very good understanding is *required*. I personally reject a variety of gods for a variety of reasons. Some are incoherent, some unsupported, some contradict what we see. Some understanding is required for these, but there are gods so poorly defined there's nothing I could accept if I wanted to. Not believing in such a god is almost forced upon me. And then there are the gods I simply know nothing about. I disbelieve precisely because I know nothing.

[@versioncity1]

"If" is the key word. The explanations & observations don't point to God they point to the cosmological theory of the universe. Good & evil. You misunderstand. - Yes we, as humans, can term actions of people good & evil if we wish, we can question right & wrong, we can behave in different ways. But how is this evidence of a God? Of course there are no artifacts of Oliver Twist. It is fiction. But there are no historic artifacts of Jesus or the disciples.

[@bubbercakes528]

Science changes as the data is better able to be understood or read. The bible never changes yet is interpreted differently as people change throughout the years. I’ll take the science over the bible any day. I hope that their is something better after this life but I know that all religions today have been proven false.

[@AlexMD242]

Personally ,as a physician and currently undergoing psychoanalysis, i´d have to say that absolutely NO book is to be taken as a dogma.

[@abelovedchildofgod7383]

Except the Bible.

[@AlexMD242]

@@abelovedchildofgod7383 I said ABSOLUTELY NO BOOK WHATSOEVER

[@MentorOfMinos]

Genesis doesn't say the earth is FLAT. It says that there is a firmament in the midst of the waters, and that the water above the earth which was kept in an equilibrium prior to the flood all precipitated during the flood which was why no one had seen rain before and why it terrified people so much. They had no idea what a flood WAS prior to Noah's day. This is typical banter from a Jesuit who has taken an oath to crush the heads of Protestant children against the wall. Read their oath sometime.

[@theseanze]

Fantastic point. Aligns with lots of psychological studies on predictable irrationality. People who live with blinders, totally focused on their little world of personal experience, will interpret everything else through that lens.

[@versioncity1]

what do you mean "all" evidence? - You mean in relation to my last comment?

[@onserfdez7958]

Not if it is verifiable through historic, comologic, and logical proof and reasoning. Space/time did have a beginning. Something did come out of nothing and I understand that point of creativity to be the mind of God.

[@onserfdez7958]

Unless you believe that things 'are' because they have a purpose. Or that all life arises from life. Or that there was a Prime Mover to start the universe in motion. That Logic dictates that there was a beginning and something started that 'beginning.' Unless you believe that Your life, my life, has a great purpose.

[@versioncity1]

Indeed, the world is an amazing place, I agree, from an ant under a rock to the planetary systems; but it isn't evidence of a creative supernatural being.

[@versioncity1]

That's fine; and of course science has moved on from 40 years ago and in 40 years time it will of moved on again. But what your saying seems, to me, to go back to the age old argument from ignorance, (I'm not saying your ignorant) in that even though we know some of the 'unknowns' of 40 years ago, the new 'unknowns' we have now you seem to be implying are 'God'. - It's no different than before, just that our position has shifted a little.

[@imorriso1]

I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. I don't recall a court ever "proving" someone guilty, just "finding" them as such (at the risk of devolving into semantic word games). I'm inclined towards the mathematic idea of a "proof" myself, though. ;)

[@Fexer12]

Honestly, you have to believe that the Bible in divinely inspired words from God himself before you even begin to reason or debate anything about it. to do that you have to first accept that there is a God, there are absolutes, and He has a way he wants you to live. Go read a book like Evidence that Demands Verdict (by Josh McDowell) Then come back and see if you comment the same. If you really want have an opinion that has weight to it...do your homework.

[@versioncity1]

So how do any of these concepts/theories in anyway point to a God? Again you misunderstand, of course we can refer to actions or thoughts as good & evil, but generally speaking, these are to do with our behaviour to other beings. No evidence that God put this notion/question within us as you suggested. There is actually very little evidence of Jesus even as a man, and no evidence whatsoever as a divine being. It's belief based on faith and speculation, as you are demonstrating.

[@onserfdez7958]

What you said. That you think that "You could say the same of the Bible or any religious text." You get where I'm coming from, right? Anyone can have an opinion or slant on anything. This, however, does not make it true or even a viable theory.

[@thekaxmax]

Where did the water go after the flood? Also, how long did the flood last--40 days, or 150? How many of each animal--2, or 7? Not even the flood story is internally consistent. And if it's not consistent with itself, how can you know it happened at all? It's all just stories from different tribes mashed togetther and edited to look better. So it can't really be the word of god.

[@versioncity1]

I don't have an argument for no intelligent design. When anyone provides a shred of evidence for it, then I will look at it, consider it and then there can be a discussion. All I have ever heard so far is faith based assumptions and imaginative leaps.

[@goldyaaron]

@Killjeser the Bible never says thou shall not kill... not once in the entie Bible if you look in the original hebrew/greek.... it says thou shall not murder.. which is a different thing... death was just merely the punishment for breaking the law...

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit I am sorry if I upset you. What I mean is that there are far more beautiful things to claim proof of the existence of God than a contradictory book full of bigotry and genocide.

[@Killjeser]

WOW. An atom has NEVER been seen. And it will never be. Because the light particle is is too big to bounce off an atom. Yet from calculations science PROVED it existed, split it and blew up Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[@niinja2]

where does the shuttle go rofl

[@Killjeser]

@Wanda4DecentValues The bible says to kill homosexuals in Leviticus and kill Non-believers in Luke, yet Thou shall not kill? It has to make sense to be literal

[@Tap0k]

Yeah, how long have they been protesting now? 400 years? 5? 6? I've lost count. You'd think they'd have taken a break or something.

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

I assume you watched the entire video given in the link... I'd say he's just a subscriber to liberal theology. That brand of theology is certainly not winning too many lay Christians over, but it has long been popular amongst priests, theologians and religious scholars. What he mentioned--God not existing, rather being the grounding of existence, and being suprapersonal rather than personal--remind me of Tillich. Claiming Jesus as symbol and taking his existence as irrelevant would complete it.

[@dookiecheez]

The speaker should have defined proof, and elaborated on how humble science is. Some people will take this to mean that it's reasonable to suggest that science doesn't have knowledge or proof of anything, let alone evolution. I hope that the speaker doesn't think one can over turn natural selection, heredity through dna, and other principles of evolution. I hear people saying the bible is metaphor and poetry, but I don't see any consistency in this approach.

[@bgilchrist228]

It tells you this man's mindset when he describes the Bible as one of his thick books on his shelf, I doubt he has read it.

[@Vargseld]

I wasnt aware that Jesus wrote the bible.

[@versioncity1]

Maybe you could examples of what you consider historical & scientific evidence. I don't think you can really have ethical evidence, at least not in the same way as historical evidence. But this was my point regarding deriving meaning. That 'ethical' (or other) meaning can be gained regardless if the story is true or not. Shakespeares work or dickens work was fiction but full of social, psychological & ethical meaning; as is most great literature.

[@weadone]

@AlexMD242 you've obviously never used a haynes manual then doc.......

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit What makes you think we know anything specific about Him now? With ALL the books all we have are different religions and One God. How many children have you stoned? How many gays have you killed? How many Atheist have you killed? How many people have you killed by working on the sabbath. Yeah, and my characterization is ignorant. But yours is enlightened cause you have a two way radio with God.

[@greenelf12]

@CandideNovella you know they are some people who take the whole thing in allegorical context, see:- The Gnostics.

[@versioncity1]

When I say explanations & observations, I am talking about scientific observation with empirical evidence, not 'a persons' own observation & thoughts. Science is certainly not "edging that way' - there is not a single bit of scientific evidence of God/creator. Your idea of Good & evil is obviously based on mythology, again no evidence of this. The gospels are not evidence of jesus as God. They are stories. Although I do think Jesus as a man (flesh & blood) probably existed.

[@onserfdez7958]

But fiction and poetry only have meaning because there is a reality to base everything upon.

[@elgar104]

What does a God have to gain by leaving his message to man so ambiguous? Capricious- much?

[@louisunger4505]

The Bible is far from ambiguous; quite the contrary.

[@elgar104]

Louis Unger 30,000 + christian denominations says you are wrong.

[@louisunger4505]

elgar104 Actually, it doesn't; and, we both know that figure is patently absurd.

[@elgar104]

+Louis Unger you are right. it is absurd. But the number I quoted is conservative. Google it. But it only had to be more than 1 to prove that the bible is ambiguous.

[@louisunger4505]

elgar104 More than one interpretation doesn't mean necessarily that the Bible is ambiguous; you're use of logic is quite flawed. Obviously there are other factors that could explain this phenomenon.

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 In the Hindu religion, Vishnu has the only deity to create the earth from a Lotus Flower. Is there some part of a religion which has a detail that another doesn't which gives it some sort of validity? So what that Christianity has a god with a Son? (and anyway, there are MANY MANY previous gods with sons. Like the Egyption god Horus. He was the son of God too, 2000 years before the fictional book of Jesus was written.

[@IAMJESUSmovie]

Jesus Christ as returned. I AM.

[@BadMannerKorea]

This guy would get destroyed by Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens or Dawkins.

[@onserfdez7958]

The Bible is not to be taken literally? Then why believe in anything in it? I guess Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Daniel, Isaiah, Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc, where metaphors also? Maybe this guy should attend a Bible Study....

[@LordYon13]

Well, if all science will be obsolete in the future, what's the point, eh? Let's stop looking, in fact, we may as well regress and roll around in the mud.

[@CandideNovella]

If he agrees that the bible is not to be taken literally then why does he and so many other believers believe what the bible says about Jesus? I think the Bible literalist are crazy but at least they do not pick and choose what is true and not true in the Bible. My wife thinks the Bible is flawed and written by man but believes the Jesus story. I ask her to explain how she can choose that part as truth but no answer. He mentions the Iliad & Oddsey as examples but no one claims they are true.

[@ClowdyHowdy]

I'm wearing the grammar nazi hat today, so I'll point out that "spelt" is incorrect, and should be written as "spelled." I correct people's grammar when they incorrectly use it to point out another's grammar. Cheers mate.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit I know you mean, Adam and Eve rebelled against God and that's why everyone dies. And them being ignorant about good and evil before the fruit does not exempt them from justice, even though they did not know they where doing something wrong. I get that part. But why then, did Jesus preach against these ideas? I mean, assuming you read the bible cover to cover. He stopped an adulteress from being stoned and said not to kill a man working on the sabbath etc etc. against the law ...

[@AndreaMaciejewski]

@Ipostle I've met Br. Guy. Your theory is completely wrong.

[@mompm]

@GundamizerFreedom you were going so well, you used logic, common sense and made an educated argument- then you started in with the lake of fire and Satan stuff- all stuff of fiction and fools not hypotheses, proving and observation

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 Ok, thanks for the positive reflection on the discussion. By the way, I studied biotechnology, have worked 20+ years in the field.

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 Oh my god! Are you serious!?? It's a religious scriputure, they can write ANY story they like!!! They did LOTS of nice things that don't exist in the bible.....SO WHAT!! So WHAT that the bible has a story of Jesus. He is NO DIFFERENT to ANY other fictional character. I can tell you about the deeds of THOR as written in their religious text, to prove THAT religious text as correct. You'd think I was delusional. As I think you are to pretend your religion is the only one right

[@imorriso1]

He said nothing of the sort. He only said that technically minded people are inclined to be literal in their interpretation, as opposed to more poetic. Speaking of unfair generalizations, you do realize the last sentence you wrote makes you a huge hypocrite?

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 Yes, it overlaps with engineering obviously, but my field is genetic technology.

[@Markhuntonio]

You gotta give credits to these priests,they sure are smart,they are behind the biggest scam of all mankind history since ages ago and theres no way of shutting they're holes for good,i mean they change the story,they adapt the script,they bring new meanings and explanations,they ask for forgivness now and then,they find new reasons,theres nothing they wouldnt do to keep the status.Church = The beast of one hundred toungs/truths.

[@foulexperiment]

"was the bible meant to be taken literally?" Of course it was. Every believer took every word as though it was meant to be taken literally for centuries. The only time that people started saying otherwise was when science began to give better explanations of the earth and geological history ect. So many pick and choose what they want to believe from that book. Are we to say that "Jesus is Lord" shouldn't be taken literally when paul proclaims it? Oh! only some parts are not literal? which ones?

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 Ohh...touche! Yeah, like I don't understand religion in it's many forms and types, and as if I don't understand the closed minded mentality of those that follow one religion or the other. Sure, go on thinking there is something I don't understand. I'm the one continually reading, learning and accepting new information every day.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit Oh okay. Now I see what you mean. You believe in evolution but not that men arrived from another ancestor. I get it.

[@ivlfounder]

@mechanicmike69 Yet you attack the sexuality of McGrath who is married to Joanna Collicutt McGrath? Yeah right.

[@greenelf12]

@lizazoon Allegory and fantasy is not the same thing...

[@myerssa7]

Does Mr. Consolmagno then draw a substative distinction between the decision to find metaphorical & spiritual fulfilment from his 30 year out-of-date physics manual & the other book on his desk? Is this decision ultimately a personal preference based upon one's own poetic & aesthetic sensibilities? Does a poem have an expiration date past which one's aesthetic palate _ought_ to find said poem objectionable? Must we continue to value metaphors which celebrate genocide, rape, slavery and misery?

[@Tap0k]

You spelt Cain and Abel right, yes. I'd say your English is pretty good!

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit How can you possibly say that. I read the bible. Yes all 66 books. Boring and contradictory as they are, what prophecies? Please show me.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit It still sounds abominable. Now matter how you dress it up, it's immoral and ridiculous. Killing someone because of their personal choice of whom they go to bed with or love, is tyrant behavior. The more people talk to me about the bible, the more I notice that their faith is not in God, but in a graven image, an idol which they call the bible.

[@onserfdez7958]

Life. Infinity. Hope. Love. A woodpecker's tongue. A giraffe's blood supply. The concept and reality of blood clotting. The fine tuning of EVERYTHING! Just amazing.

[@ArtemisScribe]

pardon?

[@onserfdez7958]

Of course I'm substituding cosmology for God! I'm a Christian! ha He is the conscious, creative force. You might want to check out your argment for no intelligent design a bit more, honestly. But you are intitled to your opinion, that's fine. I wish you well.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit The Bible is man made. Plain and simple. Nothing in it should be taken literal, or you'll go mad trying to make sense of it and come up with funny and ridiculous ideas.

[@jackferwerda]

that is my point. thanks. .. as far as your blog, sorry I probably won't have time to comment.

[@Nerefurian]

@mojo498100 Prove to me that Odin doesn't exist, for he is the one and only TRUE god! Glory be to the father, the hammer, and Valhalla!

[@ivlfounder]

@mechanicmike69 There you go again trying to run down all theists. Are you seeing a therapist?