# Biblical inerrancy and literal interpretation; why? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 25, 2002, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824 "2002-10-25T11:10:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2002, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/41 "2002-10-27T02:56:18Z")
Mangetout said: > [@](#): > > For now though I’ll say that the beginning of my transition from literalism to [whatever my current position is now called] was the collapse of my creationist views (the knowledge and patience of members here at the SDMB representing a significant contribution to that) See, and some people say those discussions never lead anywhere! 🙂 BTW, I should note that I think some people take the literalist line because they _need_ their beliefs to be true. If they have to start thinking about what is correct and what isn’t, they may be afraid the whole house of cards will collapse. For example, some 12-14 years ago, I remember having a debate on religion on a local computer BBS (yes, I’ve been at this for a while). The person I was debating talked about how he was on his last legs – down in the dumps for various reasons – until he found God. He fully admitted that God was a crutch for him – propping him up and letting him make it through the day. This is the sort of person who is not going to make any attempt to analyze his religious beliefs! ---
**Author:** ![MrThompson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MrThompson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrThompson)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2002, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/42 "2002-10-27T13:21:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by C K Dexter Haven \* > \*\*I venture to offer that NO ONE takes every word of the Bible (however defined) to be absolutely literal and infallible. There are clearly some sections that are recognized as poetry, rather than history. A few quick examples would be “the mountains danced like rams” or “the four corners of the earth.” So some of the Bible is clearly poetic, and NOT literal. > > The question is where one draws the line, that’s all. \*\* “The four corners of the earth” is never taken literally? You obviously haven’t heard of the Flat Earth Society ! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Siege](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dbc845/32.png) [@Siege](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siege)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2002, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/43 "2002-10-27T14:11:46Z")
**David B** , I’m going to slightly disagree with you here. You said > [@](#): > > He fully admitted that God was a crutch for him . . . This is the sort of person who is not going to make any attempt to analyze his religious beliefs! I also fully admit God is a crutch for me, and not just for the effect I like to think of it having on atheists (sorry!). I also regularly and routinely analyze my religious beliefs. Then again, I take seriously that commandment about “Love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy _mind_” (emphasis mine). I agree with you though. A lot of people are afraid to question any part of their faith less the whole structure collapse. My biases are showing, but to me, that implies a weakness of faith, a structure without support or a house built on sand. To me, my faith is stronger because I have questioned it and received answers which satisfy me. To bring this a bit closer to the OP, I suspect one appeal of Biblical inerrancy is it’s easier. You don’t have to think as much, and you have a firm, tangible object you can point to as the nucleus of your faith, rather than an intangible, unprovable set of beliefs. CJ ---
**Author:** ![lel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8797f3/32.png) [@lel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lel)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2002, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/44 "2002-10-27T19:00:34Z")
> [@](#): > > BTW, I should note that I think some people take the literalist line because they need their beliefs to be true. That is why I am attempting to take a more literalist tack on the Bible, from my former position of non-literalism. God is a certainly a crutch to me, but the crutch keeps collapsing on me from overanalyzing it to death and not simply relying upon it. At any rate, this board certainly makes it difficult to return to a position of uncritical acceptance of religious beliefs. > [@](#): > > I agree with you though. A lot of people are afraid to question any part of their faith less the whole structure collapse. My biases are showing, but to me, that implies a weakness of faith, a structure without support or a house built on sand. To me, my faith is stronger because I have questioned it and received answers which satisfy me. I haven’t found any satisfactory answers, and for those short few months when I was able to put aside doubt and believe without question my faith was much stronger than it is now. To answer the OP, I would rather have to believe in inerrantism to build up my faith than believe nothing at all. Whenever I consider inspiration, I feel as if I am being condemned by inerrantists (who aren’t really being condemnatory, but I worry that they will be), and I also begin to doubt. How were these people inspired? If this inspiration is so great, where are credible modern examples of this great inspiration? How do we know it was just the Bible that was inspired and not also other religious works? Considering the possibility of inspiration opens up a huge can of worms, a can which might well be best left closed. ---
**Author:** ![MrThompson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MrThompson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrThompson)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/45 "2002-10-29T13:38:01Z")
This is a complete hijack - but I was watching a programme on Darwin the other day which gave the stunning statistic that 57% of Americans still believe in a 7 day creation. Is this really true? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/46 "2002-10-29T14:37:16Z")
[The most often cited 1991 Gallup poll.](http://library.thinkquest.org/19012/gallup.htm) Creationist sites frequently misinterpret the report that only 9% accept Darwinian Evolution (as if it was up to a vote), but the more realistic interpretation is that 91% believe that God is the _ultimate_ Creator, but that nearly half of them believe God used evolutionary processes to accomplish that task. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/47 "2002-10-29T15:37:20Z")
Don’t 70% of americans also claim to believe in angels? We are a retarded people. ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/48 "2002-10-29T15:53:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MrThompson \* > \*\*This is a complete hijack - but I was watching a programme on Darwin the other day which gave the stunning statistic that 57% of Americans still believe in a 7 day creation. Is this really true? \*\* Don’t know if the percentage is true, but I’m one of them. I believe in a literal 7 day creation. Didn’t it say after each day’s creation "and the evening and the morning was the \_ day? I’m not sure. Anyway, on one certain day it said He created the plants, trees, etc. Then the next day He created the sun. The plants would have died off if the sun hadn’t been created right away. Don’t have an old testament handy or I could be more secifiic. And I"m on break and my time’s up. I believe it happened just like it said, in 7 days. What’s so hard to believe about that. The God I believe in is able to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/49 "2002-10-29T16:07:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by His4ever \* > \*\*Anyway, on one certain day it said He created the plants, trees, etc. Then the next day He created the sun. The plants would have died off if the sun hadn’t been created right away. \*\* Ummm, that is exactly the problem; the reason that plants are able to survive at night is because the air and earth store the sun’s radiated warmth - how would the plants survive overnight in between their creation and the creation of the sun the next day (particularly tender herbaceous stuff like banana plants)? - 24 hours is a long time to wait at absolute zero. ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/50 "2002-10-29T16:13:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lel \* > \*\* > How do we know it was just the Bible that was inspired and not also other religious works? Considering the possibility of inspiration opens up a huge can of worms, a can which might well be best left closed. \*\* Well, in my humble opinion, if all religious works were inspired by God they would have to agree with one another and they don’t. Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, any number of religions have their own scriptures but their teachings don’t agree with Christianity. If the same God inspired all religious literature, it would all have to agree and be in harmony and it isn’t. I believe the Bible is set apart and is God’s word to us. And I believe it’s to be interpreted literally first, unless the context indicates otherwise such as parable, allegory, poetry, etc. But He usually uses these things to portray a truth He wants to get across. Proper interpretation or “hermeneutics” as I think they call it (don’t know if spelling is correct) is important. ---
**Author:** ![Algernon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a183cd/32.png) [@Algernon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algernon)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/51 "2002-10-29T16:26:17Z")
This site quotes a Newsweek 1994 survey which states that [50% of Americans believe in angels.](http://www.millennium3.org/Fall1996/ScanSpiritual.html) This Uri Geller site quotes a 1996 Gallop survey which states that [72% of Americans believe in angels.](http://www.uri-geller.com/polls.htm) (follow the link to “More surveys and opinion polls.”) More pertinent to the OP, that same Uri Geller site quotes a 1998 Life magazine survey which states that 33% of Americans believe that the Bible is the actual word of God. Interestingly, more people believe in ghosts (45%) than believe in the Bible. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/52 "2002-10-29T16:56:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mangetout \* > \*\*Ummm, that is exactly the problem; the reason that plants are able to survive at night is because the air and earth store the sun’s radiated warmth - how would the plants survive overnight in between their creation and the creation of the sun the next day (particularly tender herbaceous stuff like banana plants)? - 24 hours is a long time to wait at absolute zero. \*\* Plus, why would it take several days to do all this anyway? Couldn’t an omnipotent God do it instantaneously? Yet another of the many clues that the scriptures were written by men who didn’t even fully grasp the idea of omnipotence. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/53 "2002-10-29T17:06:12Z")
I believe that one of the advantages that religion gives to society is that it is a labor-saving device; it saves the labor of each individual to have to come up with his or her own ethical guidelines and explanations of the universe. The innerrancy of the religion’s documents is vital to this advantage. If one has to constantly re-evaluate the sacred texts, that can be as much work or even more work than figuring out all that stuff yourself. When possible errancy is introduced into the picture, the labor-saving advantage of the religion is dimished or lost. ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/54 "2002-10-29T17:57:03Z")
Yes, but only **10%** of people believe in Uri Geller! ---
**Author:** ![Algernon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a183cd/32.png) [@Algernon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algernon)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/55 "2002-10-29T20:27:28Z")
> [@](#): > > Yes, but only 10% of people believe in Uri Geller! (grin) Based on the other irrational things people believe in, I think the percentage of people who believe in Geller is probably even disturbingly higher! I mentioned the source of the poll results only in the spirit of full disclosure. I did’t have time to find the original poll results, and the site seemed footnoted pretty well, so I went with it. I just hope that my name is not thought of as a Uri Geller believer! What a horrible (and inaccurate) association _that_ would be. ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/56 "2002-10-29T20:54:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mangetout \* > \*\*Ummm, that is exactly the problem; the reason that plants are able to survive at night is because the air and earth store the sun’s radiated warmth - how would the plants survive overnight in between their creation and the creation of the sun the next day (particularly tender herbaceous stuff like banana plants)? - 24 hours is a long time to wait at absolute zero. \*\* Leave it to you to come up with something, **Mangetout**!😃 Obviously the plants and vegetation did survive. I’d say they’d have had a much better chance if it was literal days and nights than eons of time. I looked it up and it does say after each day of creation "And the evening and morning were the first, second, third, etc. day. By using the term evening and morning I don’t see how this can mean anything other than literal days and nights of 24 hrs. That’s what it says, and that’s what it means. Is that such a hard thing to believe? God can do anything He chooses in the amount of time He chooses. Evening and morning means just what it says, not eons and eons of time. That doesn’t even make a bit of sense to me. I believe what it says. ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/57 "2002-10-29T21:04:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mangetout \* > \*\*Ummm, that is exactly the problem; the reason that plants are able to survive at night is because the air and earth store the sun’s radiated warmth - how would the plants survive overnight in between their creation and the creation of the sun the next day (particularly tender herbaceous stuff like banana plants)? - 24 hours is a long time to wait at absolute zero. \*\* I looked it up in a Bible I forgot I had here at work. It does say at the end each day of creation, "And the evening and the morning were the first, second,third, etc. day. I don’t see how this can mean anything other that what it says. Periods of 24 hrs. with evenings and mornings. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/58 "2002-10-29T21:12:58Z")
However, not every day is 24 hours-and sometimes, there are exceptions-such as at the poles-ever hear of the White Nights of St. Petersburg? Read _Inherit the Wind_, dearest. ---
**Author:** ![Algernon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a183cd/32.png) [@Algernon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algernon)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/59 "2002-10-29T21:17:56Z")
OK. I’m confused. I thought, biblically speaking, that the sun was created on the _first_ day. (“Let there be light.”) And plants weren’t created until the third day. If so, then the plant survival question is moot. If not, then how could there be “evenings and mornings” to mark the biblical “day”? A wondering mind wants to know. ---
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2002, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824/60 "2002-10-29T21:41:54Z")
Sorry for the double posting. This computer is retarded! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-inerrancy-and-literal-interpretation-why/133824.md?page=4)