The BIBLE: Literal or Figurative, or BOTH?

IMHO, if a passage is to be understood any way other than literal, it will be so noted! For instance, the "story" being prefaced by "it is like----", or "this is a parable of---" or some such.

In the case of ambiguity, I'll just take it literal until something scriptural makes me change my mind.

May be simplistic, but it sure is less conflicting than trying to correlate mans opinion with His!

 

A conservative Christian would see that the Bible is to be understand in literal terms, unless there is a valid genre in the passage being discussed, so intepret it on a literal basis, but also taking i, always some type of figurative languagento account when its a metaphor/simile/allogory/parable style!

A liberal Christian will tend to see anything that seems to be a miracle or something very unusually as ALWAYS meaning a spiritual meaning

Example...

Jonh and the whale is to be seen as a historical account of a prophet who literally was swallows by a large sea animal, while liberals see it as a myth telling us God wsants to love and save non jewish peoples also!

 

A thoroughgoing hermeneutic is one that recognizes genric differences often lead to differing approaches to a text.

There are parts of the Bible clearly not meant to be taken literally. There are parts of the Bible clearly not meant to be taken allegorically.

There are more than two options here as well.

 

With this logic, Jesus literally has feet of brass, is surrounded by 7 golden candlesticks, white hair, eyes of fire, holds 7 stars in his hand, and has a sword sticking out of his mouth that he can actually fight with, wearing clothes dripping with blood, wears many crowns on his head this whole time, and has a tattoo of sorts on his thigh.

Revelation 1:12-16, 2:16, 19:12-13, 16

 

Jesus did not make any such preface when he told his disciples "Beware the yeast of the Pharisees," and they thought he was talking about literal yeast and literal bread.

 

Came across the following article, perhaps it is not "directly" related to the conversation of "literal or allegorical", but at least tangentially. I found the article interesting and thought provoking and I do not not "know enough" to completely digest it, having not been a seminarian.

https://bible.org/article/mark-226-and-problem-abiathar

 

That is true, but the basic assumption is that inless it fits into another spefic kind of genre, should be seen as being read/understood in a literal fashion!

 

Even the allegorical and figurative passages should be taken as literal in the context of the lesson they teach. It is in that sense the entire Bible is to be taken literally.