Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How much of the Bible is literally correct?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How much of the Bible is literally correct?

    This Bible thread got me to wondering how people weigh in on the literal correctness of the Bible. By literal correctness I mean absolutely-correct-as-written (using whatever version/translation happens to be your favorite), as opposed to e.g. "well obviously Jonah wasn't actually swallowed by a whale, this was an allegory for something or another." If your exact range isn't represented then select the one that comes as close as possible, e.g. if you believe that it is 40-70% correct then the 50-60% option is probably close enough.

    The notation (x, y] means "from x exclusive to y inclusive", e.g. (23%, 20%] means "less than 23% and greater than or equal to 20%"
    20
    100%
    15.00%
    3
    (100%, 90%]
    0.00%
    0
    (90%, 80%]
    10.00%
    2
    (80%, 70%]
    5.00%
    1
    (70%, 60%]
    0.00%
    0
    (60%, 50%]
    5.00%
    1
    (50%, 40%]
    0.00%
    0
    (40%, 30%]
    10.00%
    2
    (30%, 20%]
    0.00%
    0
    (20%, 10%]
    5.00%
    1
    (10%, 0%]
    20.00%
    4
    0%
    30.00%
    6
    Only idiots insist on a banana option
    0.00%
    0
    <p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>

  • #2
    Eh, I think I was too cautious and low-balled. A better answer from me would be 60-80%.
    Captain of Team Apolyton - ISDG 2012

    When I was younger I thought curfews were silly, but now as the daughter of a young woman, I appreciate them. - Rah

    Comment


    • #3
      The beauty of those numbers is you get to choose which parts you want to be correct.
      "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
      Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

      Comment


      • #4
        I use the same 'literally correct' as we would consider any 0th century roman history. Using this definition of literally correct it is factually proven to be reasonably correct (so over 30%) with an expectation of everything else being reasonably correct. This is due to other historical accounts agreeing with the Biblical narrative (like about kings and wars pre Babylonia, and post Babylonia).

        My ~90% is due to obvious stories, because some people don't consider them obvious stories (like Daniels dream and Revelation). I assume you would want me to say 'metaphor'.

        JM
        (It's also a guess)
        Jon Miller-
        I AM.CANADIAN
        GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

        Comment


        • #5
          The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy says via the "Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics":

          WE AFFIRM the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.
          WE DENY the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support.
          "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
          "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

          Comment


          • #6
            Note that that council would also be below 100% in loinburger's definition.

            Only a few nutjobs are 100% in loinburger's definition. No denomination with more than a few thousand members is.

            JM
            Jon Miller-
            I AM.CANADIAN
            GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

            Comment


            • #7
              So you are saying you are with the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy?

              I'd go around 70%-80%. The gist of the history is true, but obviously some biased reporting and exaggerations.
              “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
              - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

              Comment


              • #8
                Albert is more comfortable with beating down a straw man.

                Comment


                • #9


                  Survey done of Americans:

                  Do you believe that the Bible is literally true and is the Word of God? Yes: 63%; No: 24%
                  Note only 69% of those surveyed were Christian
                  "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
                  "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    One-Third of Americans Believe the Bible is Literally True

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      But they don't mean literal in the way that loinburger said literal. Even those that say they do, if you talk to them they do not.

                      We already went over this.

                      JM
                      Jon Miller-
                      I AM.CANADIAN
                      GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Sorry. Rasmussen says 63%.
                        "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
                        "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Jon Miller View Post
                          But they don't mean literal in the way that loinburger said literal. Even those that say they do, if you talk to them they do not.

                          We already went over this.

                          JM
                          Wow Jon!

                          So first Scripture itself is subject to interpretation... now you're saying the meaning of the word 'literal' is subjective as well. Wow.

                          When will you just realize it's all made up?!
                          "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
                          "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Al B. Sure! View Post
                            Sorry. Rasmussen says 63%.
                            Rasmussen doesn't pass the common sense test, by your own admission. It's likely due to only offering two options rather than three like Gallup did.
                            <p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              gribbles is being silly

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X