Literally the Bible

So based on some of the comments I’ve been getting I can tell that some people have a problem thinking that God can convey truth by telling stories that aren’t factually true. Like I said before, I believe that in the book of Genesis God uses stories and poetry to communicate things to humankind that are far too complicated for us to understand. For instance, I interpret the creation poem and the story of Adam and Eve as explaining why we are here instead of how we got here. I don’t think these events took place in a literal sense but I do believe God is using a story or a poem to explain to us something that happened in the past - that God created people to be in a relationship with Him, those people were deceived, and they walked away from Him. Without even being factually true, this really does explain why the world is the way it is and why people are the way they are - but I do not have time to go into that now.

This creates a problem for people because of the belief that when God expresses himself in all of scripture, His word is true in every single way – including factually. In other words, God can’t (or won’t) use a fictional story to express truth. Anything God says has to be literally true as well as true in every other sense. One person went as far as to say that because I don’t take these stories as literal fact, I don’t even believe the word of God.

So let’s think about this for a second. God using simple stories that aren’t factually true to explain complicated and heavenly ideas to people who wouldn’t understand otherwise – this never happens in the Bible, right?

Well, you see, there was this one time when God came to earth and taught people about spirituality, heaven, and things like that. He was called Jesus, and they say he spoke in parables – stories and allegories that compare spiritual things to simple, understandable things. He was trying to get simple human beings to understand heavenly concepts, and the way he did this was never by communicating them in literal, scientific ways. Instead he said things like this:

“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit.”

“I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God until he is born again.”

“The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds in the air come and make nests in its branches.”

And then there are the stories.

At one point in Jesus’ ministry he is teaching his disciples to continue praying and not lose heart, so he tells a story about a widow who kept going to a judge and asking for justice in her case. The judge kept refusing her but she stayed persistent, and finally the judge gave her the justice she kept asking for.

At another time Jesus tells a story of a man who hoarded up all his crops in huge barns so he could “relax, eat, drink, and be merry.” But then God tells him he is going to die that night, and makes the point that those crops and barns won’t be his anymore. He concludes by saying, “So is the one who lays up treasure for himself and is not rich toward God.”

You will rarely find Jesus explaining Godly concepts to people without using stories or comparisons. In fact, when Jesus actually stops using the parables and speaks plainly, the disciples seem to be incredibly surprised. They are often confused by these parables and a lot of times they don’t seem to get it, but still that is the way that Jesus chose to teach.

So if we can accept that Jesus, who was also God, could teach by using stories and comparisons that weren’t exactly true in the most absolute, factual way (Jesus was not literally a vine), then why do we have such a problem accepting that this is the way God chose to teach us in other parts of the Bible? Jesus happened to be pretty fond of this method. Doesn’t it make sense that when the Bible was being written God (who was also Jesus) would communicate this way as well?

I think the reason that God does this is because you can’t fit things such as God or the kingdom of heaven into human language. There are spiritual concepts that exist that are so complicated and big that it would be impossible to use words to describe them. It would be like an ant trying to understand the human brain. For instance, how do you literally and scientifically explain the love of God? Well, you can’t. You can just use a poetic expression to describe a characteristic of God’s love, but you can’t say anything that will encompass it. So in the Bible you will see verses that say things such as “For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him.” And when God explains how He relates to us, He uses metaphors like a father and child, a sheep and shepherd, and a bride and a groom. That is the only way we will understand it.

As far as shaping their beliefs and opinions, some people will actually say, “Well, I just believe what the Bible says.” They say that like the Bible is absolutely clear and obvious in its meaning, like there is no room for interpretation at all. Well, it’s not that easy.

Anyone who reads the Bible is interpreting it in some way. This is one reason we have all sorts of different denominations – same Bible, different interpretations. In one random and completely unrelated circumstance, a person may say that if someone doesn’t agree with what he and his professor believe, then that person doesn’t believe the word of God at all (hypothetically speaking). Some may say that they take the entire Bible literally, but that’s probably not true. I mean, who believes that when Paul talked about a “thorn in the flesh” he was literally talking about a thorn that got stuck in his side? I mean, sure, maybe Paul was walking through the woods one day and he accidentally walked into a particularly nasty thorn bush. Those things are hard to get out if they’re deep and you don’t have some tweezers, and they do hurt. I would plead with God 3 times too if it was me. But I have this hunch that that’s not exactly what Paul meant by the thorn.

In Revelations, when John is writing about the vision God has given him, does he mean all that literally? Or do we interpret the stories and metaphors to mean something else?

You see, nobody really takes the entire Bible literally. Some may take more parts literally than others. I may take less of the Bible literally than another person does. But does that mean I believe the Bible any less than that person does, or that I don’t believe it at all? No, and to imply that in any sort of way is a very arrogant statement to make in my opinion.

Some things in this world are simply better expressed by stories or poetry. They are more meaningful that way. Donald Miller has this great example of this and I’m going to borrow it.

Say you are a girl (if you’re not already) and you’re dating some guy. You go out to eat and he has this candlelit dinner prepared for you and everything is all romantic and such. Well, you’re having a pretty good conversation and then after a while he stops and he just sort of looks at you. And then after a few seconds he pulls out a paper and pen and he starts to write. He glances up at you every few seconds and then he goes back to writing. After a few minutes he finishes, puts down his pen, turns the paper face down, and slides it over to you. You pick up the paper and start to read, and this is what it says:

You have brown hair.
You have brown eyes.
You are approximately 5 foot 6.
Your skin is a dark tan color.

You would be saying “What in the world is this?!” And he would say, “Well, it’s true! What have you got against truth? Those are all true facts!”

But let’s say that instead of that last list, what he wrote was more like this Shakespeare poem:

Had I this cheek
To bathe my lips upon; this hand, whose touch,
Whose every touch, would force the feeler's soul
To the oath of loyalty; this object, which
Takes prisoner the wild motion of mine eye

Well, it means something different, doesn’t it? It expresses things that simple facts could not even come close to. You see, God invented the human being, and God knows that a person responds to more than just the literal facts of existence. So since God knows this, why would he limit his expression to only a logical and factual explanation of how he created the world? And I would ask why would he even need to include that?

Before the enlightenment, the church actually used art such as poetry, drawings, and music to teach spirituality. Before the invention of the printing press most people couldn’t read, so the church used these forms of art to communicate the gospel of Christ. Old church cathedrals were built shaped like crosses and all kinds of artwork was put into the windows and on the walls to depict various Bible stories. This was one of the main ways of communicating the gospel back then.

When the enlightenment came, the definition of truth became very limited. People reduced truth to something you could fit into your head. At this time, truth became something that was reached through logical arguments and mathematical equations, and art such as poetry was thrown out of the picture. For the Christian, this should be ridiculous because Jesus said he is the way, the truth, and the life. However, the church adopted this assumption as well, and what they did was begin to look at the Bible through the lenses of science. And now people either interpret the poetic and narrative forms as literal truth or they just skip over them altogether. Don’t believe me? Well, when was the last time you heard a sermon preached on the Song of Solomon?

This goes back to that poem analogy. Some things you just can’t express through simple fact. You have to use another form of expression. G.K. Chesterton once wrote that it is the mathematician, not the poet, who goes mad because the mathematician tries to build a bridge over the infinite and the poet just swims in the sea. I say this because it is easy to reduce stories and poems to senseless and truth less forms of expression, which many people do to a fault. Jesus used stories all the time, and I believe God has and still does use them to communicate to our hearts today.