Is a Literal Interpretation of the Bible Even Possible?

There are actually two parts to this question:1. How can a text which contains obvious contradictions be taken literally? This appears to create a logical dilemma which cannot be solved with a literal interpretation.2. How can one resolve these logical contradictions while maintaining a literal interpretation?Some examples of contradictions within the Bible include (but are not limited to):The stories of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Namely, the in order in which creation occured.Jim Meritt Bible Contradictions » Internet InfidelsThe number of animals taken on the Ark by Noah in Genesis 7:2 and 7:8 / 7.9.Jim Meritt Bible Contradictions » Internet InfidelsThe last words spoken by Jesus as told by Matthew, Luke and John.Jim Meritt Bible Contradictions » Internet InfidelsEdited by Dave B, : Added examples of Biblical contradictions.

Example(s), please.Please add by edit to message 1, then post a "changes done" type reply to this message.Adminnemooseus

Added examples of Biblical contradictions to proposed topic including references to specific passages.

Your added materials are essentially bare links, which is a forum rule violation - Still, I'm going to promote it. We shall see what happens.This is going to the "Bible Study" forum. It should be a study of supposed contradictions/conflicts within the Bible, NOT conflicts between the Bible and worldly reality.Let the disaster ensue.Adminnemooseus

---

Please be familiar with the various topics and other links in the "Essential Links", found in the top of the page menu. Amongst other things, this is where to find where to report various forum problems.

Thread copied here from the Is a Literal Interpretation of the Bible Even Possible? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

you are conflating "literal" with "accurate". these words do not mean the same thing. while it is impossible for two contradictory statements both to be accurate, it is not impossible for both of those statements to be meant literally. one is (or both are) simply wrong. that the text literally conflicts.

---

אָרַח

Of course you can read the Bible literally. The only real issues are thinking that it is actually one book and so different stories need to be consistent and thinking that it can't simply be wrong.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Agreed. It is not impossible for both to be meant literally. However, it is impossible for both to be taken literally. And that was my question.

no, you're still confusing "literal" with "accurate". i can take something literally without also thinking it's accurate.for example, i do not think your post (which i am quoting) is accurate. however, i do not think it is therefor metaphorical, or in some way non-literal. i take your post literally, i just think it's in error.

---

אָרַח

Exactly. If you want to take the Bible literally you need to explain away the stories that conflict with your literal interpretation. It is not possible for two contradictory stories, taken literally, to both be correct.

But the Bible is not one book. And it is certainly possible for two conflicting statements to be literally true within two different stories.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

no i don't. the fact that stories contradict does not mean that i cannot read or interpret them literally. i just can't think they are all literally correct. sure. but that wasn't the question was it?

---

אָרַח

I completely understand the semantics. But you cannot take two contradictory statements regarding the same truth, literally, without confronting some sort of logical dilemma. One of the two statements has to be incorrect (not accurate).Let's assume we do not take the Bible literally, and instead we take it allegorically; both statements could be correct. Would you agree with this?

So which of the two stories is accurate? One is to be taken literally and the other would be... what? Incorrect? Allegorical? If both describe the same event they cannot both be correct.I see you want to argue semantics so let me clarify:The Bible is considered to be accurate when read literally. When two accounts contradict one another which one do we accept as accurate?

I apologize for not making it clear that those who interpret the Bible literally also believe it to be accurate. I assumed that that was implied in my asking of the question.