[Krsqk]

The Bible's credibility is only at stake for people who interpret it strictly literally. Since there are several places where the Bible itself openly states that parts of it are allegorical (e.g. Mark 4:11), I personally don't think literalism is supportable.

The literalist interpretation of the Bible holds that the Bible is literal except when it indicates a literary device is in use (i.e., parable in Mark 4:11) or one is obviously in use (Pharisees called "generation of vipers" or "serpents" in Matthew and Luke).

If I said, "Such and such happened at such a time, and it happened thus and so," I'd expect you to take what I said at face value. If I said, "Let me tell you a story with a moral; here it is," I'd expect you to understand what I meant. That's the literal interpretation of the Bible.

If you don't take the Bible literally, you get to decide what you want to take or not take. It puts man as the determining factor for what's supposed to be God's Word. What did God mean if He doesn't mean what He says? To say that declared use of allegory means nothing is literal is a logical fallacy. In syllogism form:
Some Bible is allegory.
No allegory is literal.
Therefore, no Bible is literal.

[ December 11, 2002, 23:38: Message edited by: Krsqk ]