A question about how you interpret your holy book

[graysor]

I am curious about how you interpret what is written in the bible ( or other holy books / scriptures.

Do you take it all literally? If not why not?
And how do you know / decide which bits in particular to follow ( or aspire to follow) to the letter. Vs other bits that you consider can be interpreted more loosely, or viewed differently given our current knowledge / understanding of the world.

Eg. Do you actually believe God sent a flood and killed off everyone except Noah, his family and 2 of every animal in the ark? If not, are there other parts of the bible that you do take literally? Why?

I get the feeling that most people are not of the view that everything written in the bible is true and to be taken literally. But believers must believe parts of the bible, otherwise they wouldn't be believers. So how do you know what to believe?

I don't know if I'm explaining myself very well. But I'd welcome any thoughts on this if you're willing to share.

I read different interpretations on line, have a think about what the rabbi (or bar or bat mitzvah kid) has to say, think about it myself, read the footnotes in the prayerbook.

For my own way of thinking it would be a bit bonkers to take it literally - and even if I did it's often god behaving badly or people being awful ... so it's not exactly (to me) something that always makes sense to me. In which case I just ignore and move on as no-one's forcing me to adhere to any particular line.

In a sense, to me, it's about mentally training your brain - like with learning math or Latin declensions, but in this case with morality. So it's not bending the text to suit my purpose, but really deeply pondering a variety of ideas about specific words, back stories, characters' motivations etc.

Ooh, lots of replies. Pleased to see I've sparked a bit of a discussion. Will properly read the new posts before chipping in myself again!

So it looks like Lizzie is of the chocolate box approach. Where you take what you like the sound of, as guidance for how to live or whatever. And the bits that don't make sense to follow as according to your existing belief / morals/ world view, you view as something to be ignored, or as a discussion point?

And my understanding of Niminy's interesting points is basically the same.

I'm also intrigued by this point of niminy's:
" that interpretation takes place within certain parameters - larger frameworks of belief and theological concepts, traditions of the church, and communities of interpreters."

As this seems to me a bit of a circular argument. Interpretation of the scripture is in the context of existing beliefs, concepts, traditions etc, which presumably came from reading of the scriptures?

Well, not quite. I think my morals were pretty set by the time I started turning up at the synagogue (parents weren't religious). It's more to confirm what I think or stretch me. For me it's more being part of a community who are making an effort to think about these things, plus the comfort of ritual, plus the opportunity to discuss text and pull it apart.

So lizzieoak your pretty much the same as I am. You have already figured out your own morals before religion even enters the equation. Church is only used for testing with others what you believe. And the books are just window dressing that are shoe horned in at the edges.

For your perusal.

www.goldenageproject.org.uk/genesis.php