31% of American adults believe the Bible is Literal Word of God - Belief strongest among those without college degrees

[de_sjiem 0]

About one-third of the American adult population believes the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally word for word, a new Gallup poll reveals. This percentage is only slightly lower than several decades ago.

[...]

I find it interesting how just a few words can change the entire meaning of a statement... I myself believe the Bible is the actual word of God, but do not take it literally word for word... There is too much symbolism and metaphor in there...

[one...two...tree 2,762]

About one-third of the American adult population believes the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally word for word, a new Gallup poll reveals. This percentage is only slightly lower than several decades ago.

I find it interesting how just a few words can change the entire meaning of a statement... I myself believe the Bible is the actual word of God, but do not take it literally word for word... There is too much symbolism and metaphor in there...

Well said. I'm right there with you on that.

[Niels Bohr 72]

I am my own God. I preach what I do. There is no other God than myself.

[fozzie 41]

I too do not believe that the bible is completely factual. There may have been a guy named jesus that was crucified for claiming to be the son of god andthere may not have been. The bible has been written by men and is more than likely a form of social control. How do we keep thee masses under our control? Tell them god laid down the laws. There are too many inconsistant and contradictory reference in the bible, not to mention that everybody has a different interpretation of the bible and its meanings. Only man could have made it this way. If it truely were the word of god then it would be perfect and flawless. They should have made it clearer.

Also, those that preach from the bible are some of the worst hypocrits! How many times do i read in the news about some minister abusing young children. Why? Did god tell them too? Is it in the bible? Maybe they all misinterpreted man shall not lie with man, kids are ok though!

You also have to take the bible in the context of when it was written. two thousand years ago people would interpret events differently than any of us would today. If i came to you and told you i was the son of god, here are twelve of my friends than can tell you that its true, what would you say? Nothing, you would just lock me away in a padded cell until i were "well" again. If i walked on water you would insist that it was some illusion, a trick.

I will not say that there is definitely not a higher power because i just don't know. I don't feel there is but i might be wrong. I just don't see how taking the bible litterally or not would affect your belief in god. The messages remain the same and are stilll valid.

Big Bang Theory - and it is just a theory - leaves room for god's creation and genesis. Nobody knows what came before the big bang so you can argue that god did it (thats the catholic churches official position). Evoloutionary theory is also just a theory but again leaves room for the hand of God (not diego maradona). God sparked life millions of years ago and by his design we evolve, beter ourselves, overcome new threats to our species. If we don't eveolve then we will be wiped out eventually. If we adapt and change to better fit our environment then we will continue - albeit in a slightly different form.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Also, those that preach from the bible are some of the worst hypocrits!

[de_sjiem 0]

Also, those that preach from the bible are some of the worst hypocrits! How many times do i read in the news about some minister abusing young children. Why? Did god tell them too? Is it in the bible? Maybe they all misinterpreted man shall not lie with man, kids are ok though!

Don't judge a large group of people by a small percentage... For every preacher that has done that to young boys there are thousands who havent... There are many others (who arent preachers) that do that too... its sick, but it is in no way a minister thing... (And there are PLENTY of ministers that are wonderful wonderful people)

Its like saying those that immigrate to the states thru marriage are only doing it for the greencard... but we all know that isnt true!

[Artegal 1]

All I have to say is that 31% of the time I believe in GOD! The other 69 I am Shouting "Oh My God!" And then my faith is renewed yet again.

[truffles 2]

It is an interesting debate - I ( for variety of reasons and circumstances) did not make it to university and possess no degree however i was fortunate to be educated in a school that encourage both religious education and science ( so darwins theory came up). I was always led to beleive the bible is a collection of versions of events as recounted by several different disciples - it has always been a bone of contention that out the many disciples essentially only 4 accounts where held up as the definitive story. I was also taught that once you have two sides of the story then you can make up your own mind. I think most people are tolerant ofothers beliefs as long as they do not infringe or cause violence to others. I was also once told there are three things that cause the greatest problems in the world MONEY RELIGION & SEX!

[chri'stina 190]

Also, those that preach from the bible are some of the worst hypocrits! How many times do i read in the news about some minister abusing young children. Why? Did god tell them too? Is it in the bible? Maybe they all misinterpreted man shall not lie with man, kids are ok though!

Don't judge a large group of people by a small percentage... For every preacher that has done that to young boys there are thousands who havent... There are many others (who arent preachers) that do that too... its sick, but it is in no way a minister thing... (And there are PLENTY of ministers that are wonderful wonderful people)

Its like saying those that immigrate to the states thru marriage are only doing it for the greencard... but we all know that isnt true!

[Portlander 0]

Harvard U is proposing COMPULSORY religious education.

I would actually say that college professors DO generally act to keep belief in the Bable as word-for-word true at a minimum. This is because it is clearly and patently NOT word-for-word. There are several points where the Bible was clearly re-written. The Bible itself acknowledges it. Why would God re-write his own devine wisdom? (The Mormons do this, btw!) If God is all knowing and all powerful and all seeing, why wouldn't God put down a document that didn't need to be re-written? Really, history shows that Ezekiel was a xenophobe who left a good job and a good life in Babylon in order to go back to Isreal. The Biblical account of Nebuchanezzar's conquest of Isreal is wildly innacurate.

In fact, Old Neb appointed Kings in the line of David to rule Isreal, and they one by one made secret pacts with Egypt. After the 3rd one, Neb exiled the malcontents to Babylon where they got good, high paying jobs, owned land, had slaves, etc etc in Babylon (Baghdad) according to Babylonian tax documents and other non-Biblical evidence. Most people in Iseal were never exiled, even the aristocracy, and in the meantime, Neb was responsible far a many building projects. Most of the buildings traditionally attributed to David/Solomon were really Babylonian. Go figure. When Cyrus The Great (I thik thats the right guy) conquored Babylon, most Jews STAYED. There were over 500,000 Jews in Iraq in the 1950s. They are mostly gone now, with the modern political strife, but it is a testament to the typically tolerant conditions the Jews lived in up until 100 years ago. The council of Nicea is another instance where the Bible was re-written, and the Dead Sea Scrolls show several drafts of the same documents, and seem to indicate that someone was rewriting the stories to acheive a desired effect.

Certainly, I am allowed to have faith in whatever I believe in, but that does not mean that whatever I believe in reflects reality. I don't have the right (nor the ability) to make the outside world conform to my beliefs. A website that makes this point is http://www.venganza.org/ .... It is not meant to redicule (at least am not posting it with that intent), but it does make the point that beliefs are not the same as facts.

I am not proposing that I have a lock on facts, either. I've spent enough time learning about perception and human sensory systems to know that perception is a very very unreliable thing. My own included. History is a funny thing, like your own eyes, they seem clear, but really they lie to you most of the time.

I think the Bible has many good points and a lot of good in it. It also has a lot of bad in it. True believers, with nothing but ardent faith, can justify anything they want from its words ... and have. It is ancient avant-garde art. You get out of it what you want to get out of it. Most people are good, so most people get good out of it. I think it has less to do with the Bible in particular so much as it is the nature of Man, but then that is my own faith, huh?

I don't believe that college professors go out of their way to disprove the Bible, but I think that simply learning about history and science shows that the Bible just can't be literal.

Persoanlly, I'm mostly Buddhist. The point of Buddhism is simply to see the world for what it really is. Buddhism is supposed to be a process by which we take off the lenses that we all have that distort our perception and our own knowledge. I also greatly resonate with the idea that the process is different for everyone, and a proscribed method, with Hell as a punishment, is just not the best way for veryone. Its not something that an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God would do. My feeling is that religion is something that people use to become better people. Some people thrive with a proscribed method. Others falter. But that is where I am coming from, and that is what makes sense to me.

[SteveLaura 0]

If the issue is the capacity of the ark, I don't think that is a problem. The ark was very large, so had plenty of room. Most land species are not very large; few are elephant-sized. There is also the question of how many specific species existed at the time, and thus how many would be represented on the ark. There were probably fewer actual "species" than there are today. Plus, the animals were not necessarily all fully grown individuals, which would also reduce the needed space.

Were extra species created after the flood or did they evolve?

How did Noah round up all these animals?

Were insects on board? How many? How did he keep them in place? How did he know he had a male and a female?

How did he feed and water them?

Why was Noah chosen?

Could God have caused a flood and saved the animals or created new ones afterwards? Why did he need man and a big boat?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If the issue is the capacity of the ark, I don't think that is a problem. The ark was very large, so had plenty of room. Most land species are not very large; few are elephant-sized. There is also the question of how many specific species existed at the time, and thus how many would be represented on the ark. There were probably fewer actual "species" than there are today. Plus, the animals were not necessarily all fully grown individuals, which would also reduce the needed space.

Why would you think there would be fewer species a (mere) few thousand years ago than there are today?

Quibbling about the size of the ark in that respect is irrelevant - we're clearly talking about a very massive construction, that would be much larger than the biggest ship of the line in the 16th-19th centuries.

Wood, leather, canvass and tar were good enough for relatively small ships, but there's a reason that supertankers and cargo transporters aren't made of the same materials. Weight is an issue of course, but so too is size. Once you build beyond a certain size, you have to consider whether the materials you're using can handle the stresses of the load you're putting them under as well as the torsion and shear that the construction goes through in the sea. It just isn't physically possible.

BTW - anyone who's worked on an oil tanker (or any other large ship) can tell you that the hull actually twists and bends simply from the stresses they are put under by the sea. On oil tankers at least, the deck ripples - and these things are made of iron and steel.

[GaryC 7]

If the issue is the capacity of the ark, I don't think that is a problem. The ark was very large, so had plenty of room. Most land species are not very large; few are elephant-sized. There is also the question of how many specific species existed at the time, and thus how many would be represented on the ark. There were probably fewer actual "species" than there are today. Plus, the animals were not necessarily all fully grown individuals, which would also reduce the needed space.

Why would you think there would be fewer species a (mere) few thousand years ago than there are today?

Quibbling about the size of the ark in that respect is irrelevant - we're clearly talking about a very massive construction, that would be much larger than the biggest ship of the line in the 16th-19th centuries.

Wood, leather, canvass and tar were good enough for relatively small ships, but there's a reason that supertankers and cargo transporters aren't made of the same materials. Weight is an issue of course, but so too is size. Once you build beyond a certain size, you have to consider whether the materials you're using can handle the stresses of the load you're putting them under as well as the torsion and shear that the construction goes through in the sea. It just isn't physically possible.

BTW - anyone who's worked on an oil tanker (or any other large ship) can tell you that the hull actually twists and bends simply from the stresses they are put under by the sea. On oil tankers at least, the deck ripples - and these things are made of iron and steel.

It all comes down to faith. If you believe then you don't need a scientific explanation. For those that have faith and believes in the ultimate power of God then it's easy to believe that God can make anything possible. If someone needs to place a human explanation of a miracle then the faith just isn't there and nothing will convince that person. It's all up to each person to decide what they believe.

[SteveLaura 0]

God can make anything possible.

Then why Noah? Why an ark?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If the issue is the capacity of the ark, I don't think that is a problem. The ark was very large, so had plenty of room. Most land species are not very large; few are elephant-sized. There is also the question of how many specific species existed at the time, and thus how many would be represented on the ark. There were probably fewer actual "species" than there are today. Plus, the animals were not necessarily all fully grown individuals, which would also reduce the needed space.

Why would you think there would be fewer species a (mere) few thousand years ago than there are today?

Quibbling about the size of the ark in that respect is irrelevant - we're clearly talking about a very massive construction, that would be much larger than the biggest ship of the line in the 16th-19th centuries.

Wood, leather, canvass and tar were good enough for relatively small ships, but there's a reason that supertankers and cargo transporters aren't made of the same materials. Weight is an issue of course, but so too is size. Once you build beyond a certain size, you have to consider whether the materials you're using can handle the stresses of the load you're putting them under as well as the torsion and shear that the construction goes through in the sea. It just isn't physically possible.

BTW - anyone who's worked on an oil tanker (or any other large ship) can tell you that the hull actually twists and bends simply from the stresses they are put under by the sea. On oil tankers at least, the deck ripples - and these things are made of iron and steel.

It all comes down to faith. If you believe then you don't need a scientific explanation. For those that have faith and believes in the ultimate power of God then it's easy to believe that God can make anything possible. If someone needs to place a human explanation of a miracle then the faith just isn't there and nothing will convince that person. It's all up to each person to decide what they believe.

Well that's certainly true - but Scott was trying to offer a rational explanation for something that can't be proven. Clearly there are physical realities to deal with when making any sort of large construction - a massive wooden ship that could take animals 2 by 2 (in such a way to preserve the smallest animals from getting crushed and with enough people and supplies to maintain them; as well as for their own needs) is not only an engineering impossibility, but completely impractical.

That's what I don't understand - its all well and good having faith, but many people do try to come up with rational, scientific explanations of things that are ultimately unproveable and unexplainable. I mean - the fact that we even have a debate over Evolution and Creationism/Intelligent Design (with some people trying to insert the latter into high-school science classrooms - where it blatantly doesn't belong) would seem to be proof of that...