What part of the bible should we not interpret literally?

[razzer_rising]

I always hear na some parts are not to be taken literally especially those na controversial like days of creation and other Yung ibang parts naman to be taken as it is. So which part is to be taken literally which part is metaphorical? Who decides?

[sophion]

for catholics literal iyung "eat my flesh and drink my blood".

for born again literal iyung "god so loved the world". kayat "jeeeezes loves you!"

for INC literal iyung "messenger from the east"


-------
kanya kanyang trip lang.

[PgUp]

for catholics literal iyung "eat my flesh and drink my blood".

for born again literal iyung "god so loved the world". kayat "jeeeezes loves you!"

for INC literal iyung "messenger from the east"


-------
kanya kanyang trip lang.

You ought to watch a BBC documentary special about Christianity that investigates the origins and traditions as it spreads out from the Holy Land. The Eucharistic sacrifice of the Holy Mass is celebrated by churches established by the apostles. The oldest surviving Christian church (building) is located in Syria, and it offers traditional holy mass more orthodox than Catholics do.

[Ateo]

This is an excellent thread. It is really confusing which parts of the Bible is literal and which are metaphorical.

When Jesus said he will come back soon (before all the hearers would have died), was it literal?

When he instructed that one had to sell his all and give to the poor, was it literally "all"?

When he said that he did not bring peace but discord, was he literal?

When he asked the apostles to leave their families and follow him, did he mean literally -- thus reducing the apostles' families to destitution (in those times, widows could not work and will be reduced to poverty)?

What are the rules to guide us to say that that verse is literal and that other is metaphorical?

[marcus_hunt]

Kapag mahirap gawin eh di Jesus was metaphorically speaking. Kapag madali lang eh di literal. Kayo naman.

Pero yun eating flesh at drinking blood - literal daw yun. Mahirap nga gawin kaya nag-imbento ng pseudoscience/philosophical/fantastical/barbaric term ng transubstantiation at binigyan ng holy spirit ang mga pari ng magic power para gawin yun sa wafer at mumpo.

Imagine that power! Kaya nila gawin flesh/blood yun pero di nila kaya protektahan against virus/bacteria kaya pag may kumakalat na sakit medyo naiiba ang procedures.

Isipin mo tuwing misa, pumipila sila - bata, matanda etc - para kumain ng karne at uminom ng dugo... sa harap ng rebulto ng tao na duguan, half naked at nakapako sa krus.

FYI
[B]Transubstantiation:[B](in Latin, transsubstantiatio, in Greek μετουσίωσις metousiosis) is the doctrine that, in the Eucharist, the substance of wheat bread and grape wine changes into the substance of the Body and the Blood of Jesus while all that is accessible to the senses (the appearances - species in Latin) remains as before.

In laymen terms: alak at wafer yan pero KUNYARI real flesh and blood.

kantutinkopit, baka kaya di nakita yun bangkay ni Jesus eh dahil may kumain nun... yun 12 kaya nakichow din?

[TrollMontero]

Naku yang mga bopols na cathols na yan sigurado hindi ma-eexplain to...


puro bunganga lang sila eh.. puro hangin naman ang laman ng ulo, ga-munggo lang ang utak..

[marcus_hunt]

Naku yang mga bopols na cathols na yan sigurado hindi ma-eexplain to...


puro bunganga lang sila eh.. puro hangin naman ang laman ng ulo, ga-munggo lang ang utak..

sobra ka naman.

pero ok lang yun gamunggo utak, kasi gamunggong faith nga kaya na nila magmove ng mountains di ba?

ay teka di pala yun literal.

[PgUp]

This is an excellent thread. It is really confusing which parts of the Bible is literal and which are metaphorical.

Jesus explains it quite concretely and said that such holy instructions were made for people who belong. For those who do not belong, the parables or figures of speech would keep them at a distance. The end would come but those who do not belong would not even notice what is already happening.

[Ateo]

Jesus explains it quite concretely and said that such holy instructions were made for people who belong. For those who do not belong, the parables or figures of speech would keep them at a distance. The end would come but those who do not belong would not even notice what is already happening.

Where is this concrete explanation? What verse?

Easier in theory than in practice. Did the bread literally changed to flesh? Depending on which group you BELONG, you would have different answer to that question. Why can't all Christian groups agree on which are literal and which are metaphorical?

[PgUp]

The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. This is why I speak to them in parables:
“Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.’

But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

“Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in their heart. This is the seed sown along the path. The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful. But the seed falling on good soil refers to someone who hears the word and understands it. This is the one who produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.”

Agreed? Use the parable of the Sower to search for the passages.

[Pyros]

What part of the bible should we not interpret literally?

everything....

[tonton]

Anything that has to do with money should not be taken literally. Maraming magagalit. Dapat laging figurative.

[tonton]

Kapag mahirap gawin eh di Jesus was metaphorically speaking. Kapag madali lang eh di literal. Kayo naman.

Pero yun eating flesh at drinking blood - literal daw yun. Mahirap nga gawin kaya nag-imbento ng pseudoscience/philosophical/fantastical/barbaric term ng transubstantiation at binigyan ng holy spirit ang mga pari ng magic power para gawin yun sa wafer at mumpo.

Imagine that power! Kaya nila gawin flesh/blood yun pero di nila kaya protektahan against virus/bacteria kaya pag may kumakalat na sakit medyo naiiba ang procedures.

Isipin mo tuwing misa, pumipila sila - bata, matanda etc - para kumain ng karne at uminom ng dugo... sa harap ng rebulto ng tao na duguan, half naked at nakapako sa krus.

FYI
[B]Transubstantiation:[B](in Latin, transsubstantiatio, in Greek μετουσίωσις metousiosis) is the doctrine that, in the Eucharist, the substance of wheat bread and grape wine changes into the substance of the Body and the Blood of Jesus while all that is accessible to the senses (the appearances - species in Latin) remains as before.

In laymen terms: alak at wafer yan pero KUNYARI real flesh and blood.

kantutinkopit, baka kaya di nakita yun bangkay ni Jesus eh dahil may kumain nun... yun 12 kaya nakichow din?

Kuminsan napapamura ako sa kagaguhan na isinaksak sa mga baga natin eh.

[razzer_rising]

Anything that has to do with money should not be taken literally. Maraming magagalit. Dapat laging figurative.

You know You are right. I think the reason is most of those who interpret the bible have huge money and they dont want to part with their money.

[theven]

It’s nonsense… it’s like asking, ”which part(s) of Harry Potter books series can be taken literally?”


how about of Marvel Comics? DC? Tarzan? Voltes V?

[tonton]

You know You are right. I think the reason is most of those who interpret the bible have huge money and they dont want to part with their money.

Oo nga.. sabi nga ni smartness lahat daw ng pag-aari niya si lord talaga ang may ari so hindi niya puwedeng ibenta at give to the poor.

[sophion]

The Eucharistic sacrifice of the Holy Mass is celebrated by churches established by the apostles.

even in biblical times the early church ate bread & wine together. but that doesnt mean they saw it as the literal flesh & blood of God.

Heck we couldnt even tell for sure if the early christians believed that jesus is God himself.

[PgUp]

even in biblical times the early church ate bread & wine together. but that doesnt mean they saw it as the literal flesh & blood of God.

Heck we couldnt even tell for sure if the early christians believed that jesus is God himself.

How can you speak for them? In this day and age, there should be no such argument since the people who preserved these traditions are the ones who were interviewed. I bet the producer-show anchor traveled to far places not to dispute but just report on what he discovered. My point is there are many apostolic churches that developed separately from each other and one of them is the Catholic Church. The celebration of the Holy Mass, which is symbolic of the Last Supper of Jesus and all his Apostles seems to be common practice too, among early churches established by apostles.

[TrollMontero]

Nasan na yung mga ungas na debaters na yan??? Bat di makasagot??

Puro yabang lang pala kayo eh.. ahahah,

[Fenix]

Sana yung mga nagp-print ng bible gumawa ng version na magka-iba kulay ng ink na ginagamit para sa mga literal at figurative/parable passages at events para yung mga followers ng religion nila (e.g. version ng xtianity) hindi na magmumukhang engot sa pag-interpret.

Tapos sasabihan pa ng leaders nila (at ibang nagmamagaling na followers) na dapat enlightened sila at malakas ang faith para maintindihan ang mga nakasulat kung literal o hindi. Palusot.