break with your past

when i was a kid, i read the bible. though i guess everyone can attest to reading the bible, i sort of read it from front to back, skipping the psalms, the prophets, the letters, and everything else that did not constitute "action" to my childish mind. i wanted to read about the war exploits of joshua and moses, the adventures of the apostles, and of course, the perennial highschool favorite, revelations. (i believed it and was scared to death. now, everyone knows revelations is full of poetic symbolism.) somehow i believed every word of what i've read - every if not most children are gullible.

which leads us to the topic: how seriously should the Bible be taken?

mr. kalam (it's funny how everyone cares about him now) quoted a passage from leviticus about eating pork.

"And the pig, though it has a split hoof completely divided, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you." - Leviticus 11:7-8 (New International Version)

leviticus is part of the 3 of 5 books of the torah that deal with the rules. the thing about these "rulebooks", if you will, is that they were meant for the hebrews and judaism. (what do you think bar mitzvahs are for?) and it doesn't take a genius to know that there is an obvious difference between judaism and christianity. therefore that verse or the books themselves aren't required to be followed by us. in fact, scholars interpret the book as a prophecy of Christ's coming.

going back to the Bible in general. i, for one, view the Bible, save for majority of the New Testament, as mostly literature. also, some people take revelations (*coughtruthseekercough*) way too seriously. they take it word for word, not as symbolism. yes, i do agree that in some point in time the world will end, but not exactly as described in the book.

there is also the case of the book of Genesis clashing with the Big Bang theory. i, for one, would not completely agree about Genesis's account of the world's creation, but instead i'll go for the theory of a scientific God. that seems to be the more logical way to go (see the Five Ways).

all in all, the Bible should be revered as both historical and theological, yes, but in some cases it needs to be taken in with a grain of salt.