old

[Paisley Hedgehog]

nm

[HFClassicalAcademy]

Catholics!!

 

Liz in NC

[MgoBlue]

I was going to agree with above poster sort of. Catholics. Oh we/I believe the Bible was Divinely Inspired, but you have to be careful to read it with an appreciation of the times it was written in. Bible scholars can verify things & stuff...but today's literal meaning of a word may not match the meaning of a word 2000 or more years ago.

HTH.

[H.S. Burrow]

Methodist :)

[Renee in NC]

I was going to agree with above poster sort of. Catholics. Oh we/I believe the Bible was Divinely Inspired, but you have to be careful to read it with an appreciation of the times it was written in. Bible scholars can verify things & stuff...but today's literal meaning of a word may not match the meaning of a word 2000 or more years ago.

HTH.

 

Yes, the Bible is the divine and inspired word of God and the Church doesn't take any stance on Creation other than that God created the Earth. The importance of the flood story is not about the flood, but how it foreshadows baptism.

 

However, I don't think that the Church is a denomination.;)

 

Here is a link to "Creation and Genesis":

 

http://www.catholic.com/library/Creation_and_Genesis.asp

[Laura Corin]

Definitely - I think that most in the Church of England see a lot of the Bible as figurative.

 

Laura

[Melora in NC]

The Episcopal Church.

Actually, the Episcopal Chruch does not have an official stand on evolution/the age of the earth. In this, as in a lot of things, they allow for a wide range of opinion. While googling to see if there Was any sort of official statement on the subject I found this article which talks about creation.

Edited September 13, 2009 by Melora in NC

[Pam Wilhelm]

Christian Science. :D

[Tracy in Ky]

What do you mean by "literally?" To read the Bible literally means to read it and understand it in the sense it was intended.

 

Sometimes this requires a straight-forward reading (the flood really happened), sometimes this requires a metaphorical reading (Jesus is door--but not a wooden one with hinges), sometimes this requires reading with anthropomorphizing in mind (God doesn't have arms--he is spirit), etc.

 

I am a Christian who understands the Bible literally, but I never, ever check my brain at the door. I find Bible study and the Christian life incredibly rigourous.:)

[Pip]

I would agree with Catholics. I was raised CAtholic and was not really taught the typical Bible stories in school and the ones I was taught I was told merely illustrated a point. I was also taught evolution in Catholic school and nothing about Creationism.

 

I would say the more "liberal" or "mainstream" (choose your tearm) of most denominations allow more wiggle room in interpreting the Bible. These are some denomiations I see that way and their more literal counterparts in parentheses. BTW, I may not have this completely straight and it does not mean that some of these literal churches may not have liberal congregations and vice versa. I am just going more by the offical party line!

 

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod)

 

United Methodist Church (Free Methodist Church, I think)

 

Presbyterian Church, USA (Presbyterian Church in America, Orthodox Presbyterian Church)

 

Disciples of Christ (Church of Christ)

 

Episcopalians (Anglican Orthodox Church)

 

United Church of Christ, including Congregational churches

[Ellie]

Catholics!!

 

Liz in NC

Hmm...not sure I can agree with that. The Church teaches that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but it also teaches that the Holy Traditions passed down by the Church are important, too; IOW, that much of the Bible is sort of defined by Tradition. The Church defines what the Bible is; the Bible does not define what the Church is.

[DarlaS]

Methodist :)

 

I was raised Methodist, and they absolutely took the 6 day creation and flood literally--in our church anyway.

[Melinda in VT]

The United Church of Christ is a non-creedal church, so members of the congregation often have different beliefs about the Bible, especially in rural areas like mine where there are fewer churches from which to choose.

[willowcreek]

The answer is yes--absolutely. I happen to have an M.Div. and there are many denominations that consider the literary genre and historical setting of each component of scripture AND consider it Divinely inspired. Episcopalians (of which I am one) definitely fall in this category, as do many Catholics. Many Methodists and Presbyterians and others do, too. It may be the region of the country that makes it seem that Christians are absolute in their literal interpretation stance.

 

Here in Alabama, it can easily appear to be the case. Even Methodists and many Presbyterians seem to be more literalist. Note the differences in denominations--for instance--there is more than one group of Presbyterians, Baptists or Lutherans. Often that is at the heart of the differences.

 

Presbyterian Church USA, ELCA Lutherans, American Baptists would all tend toward a more strong belief in the inspiration of scripture, but not a literal-only interpretation. Their counterparts (PCA, Missouri Synod Lutheran, Southern Baptist) tend toward more literal fundamentalism.

[....]

We're Lutheran (conservative Missouri Synod) and we're entirely scriptural-based. They have a saying that if you attend service every sunday for 2 years, then you have read the entire Bible.

 

I was raised in a family that was Southern Baptist and other than the veil of tradition in the Lutheran church (like singing the liturgy, the procession, etc) there really is no huge difference in beliefs. Except our Lutheran sermons aren't as rowdy as the Baptist ones I went to as a kid. :D

 

But...I'm still fond of both churches. There's a place for both of 'em.

[PineFarmMom]

I am a Christian who understands the Bible literally, but I never, ever check my brain at the door. I find Bible study and the Christian life incredibly rigourous.:)

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[HFClassicalAcademy]

Hmm...not sure I can agree with that. The Church teaches that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but it also teaches that the Holy Traditions passed down by the Church are important, too; IOW, that much of the Bible is sort of defined by Tradition. The Church defines what the Bible is; the Bible does not define what the Church is.

 

Yes, I agree with you...which is why I stated that Catholics do not take the Bible literally. Just keeping my answer as simple as possible!

 

Liz in NC

[QueenCat]

We go to an United Methodist Church. Every thing we believe is based on the Bible. We believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. However, we recognize that not everything is to be taken literally. There is so much symbolism, along with metaphors and parables throughout the Bible. If one doesn't learn about the culture of the time period, they will have a hard time understanding what is going on. I can't stand it when I hear people say our church isn't scripturally based, or that if you don't take it literally, you aren't really a believer. That is so not true. Being scriptually based and taking things literally are two different things. The UMC strongly encourages its members to read the Bible, study the Bible, and think for ourselves. Most people I know in my church do not believe in a 6 day literal creation but they know God created the world. They are not dis-believing the Bible but recognizing the symbolism that was present from the beginning. The bottom line for us is that Jesus died and rose again, for our sins.

[Heather in Neverland]

I guess I don't understand why taking the Bible literally = checking your brain at the door???

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Not looking to stir up a debate here, but I am wondering if there are any Christian denominations that do not take the Bible as literal truth. By this I mean that the church does not teach as absolute truth the 6-day creation, a worldwide flood, etc. Is there such a thing as a Christian church that sees Genesis as more figurative than historical, but still teaches Jesus as divine?

 

It may just be my geographical location that I am dealing with primarily fundamentalist denominations, but more and more I feel that I've got to leave my brain in the parking lot to enter the church building :crying:

 

 

Episcopals, Catholics, and Unitarian Universalists do not. I would also check the web pages of Evangelical Lutheran, Presbyterian, and United Church of Christ churches as well. In fact, I think there is a plethora of churches who do not take the bible literally. Your best bet would be to check out the statements of beliefs on the denominations home pages to see what is a good fit:)

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

We go to an United Methodist Church. Every thing we believe is based on the Bible. We believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. However, we recognize that not everything is to be taken literally. There is so much symbolism, along with metaphors and parables throughout the Bible. If one doesn't learn about the culture of the time period, they will have a hard time understanding what is going on. I can't stand it when I hear people say our church isn't scripturally based, or that if you don't take it literally, you aren't really a believer. That is so not true. Being scriptually based and taking things literally are two different things. The UMC strongly encourages its members to read the Bible, study the Bible, and think for ourselves. Most people I know in my church do not believe in a 6 day literal creation but they know God created the world. They are not dis-believing the Bible but recognizing the symbolism that was present from the beginning. The bottom line for us is that Jesus died and rose again, for our sins.

:iagree: as well as many other Christians:)

[mommyrooch]

I am Southern Baptist and while some SB's take it literally there are some that don't.

 

I am one of those. I believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God but I also think that it was given to us as a guideline. For example, I do not believe in a literal 7 days of creation but I have no doubt that God created everything. I just don't think he did it in a literal 7 days.

 

Another example would be versus like the one that if your left eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Now I don't "literally" think that we are supposed to pluck our eyes out. I take this as an example of how important it is not to use our eyes for sinful purposes.

 

Jesus talked in parables all throughout the new testament.

 

I think people get so caught up in doctrine issues like creation and lose sight of the big picture. Salvation. I personally don't think it matters if God created the world in 7 days or in millions or billions of years as long as we give him the honor and glory for doing it. Salvation in the key. I don't think it matters if you are Baptist, Catholic, Morman, Presbyterian or any other denomination. Denominations were created by man and are therfore subject to error. Not one denomination is perfect just as not one man is perfect. I believe that standing on the same foundation (i.e. salvation) is what makes us Christian, not what denominational chruch we attend and not whether we interpret certain passages of scripture as being literal or not.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

Well, as a kid, I went to Lutheran, Cahtolic, Assembly of God, and Baptist churches in that order. I would say that although they believed in the Bible as God's word, they didn't take all of it literally in the Lutheran and Catholic churches. On the other hand, the Assembly of God and Baptist Churches took every little thing literally.

 

According to my sister who currently attends a Methodist church, they do not take the Bible literally.

[PiCO]

Not looking to stir up a debate here, but I am wondering if there are any Christian denominations that do not take the Bible as literal truth. By this I mean that the church does not teach as absolute truth the 6-day creation, a worldwide flood, etc. Is there such a thing as a Christian church that sees Genesis as more figurative than historical, but still teaches Jesus as divine?

 

It may just be my geographical location that I am dealing with primarily fundamentalist denominations, but more and more I feel that I've got to leave my brain in the parking lot to enter the church building :crying:

 

I never met anyone who did take the bible literally until I started homeschooling. I was astounded.

 

I think the stories of all cultures that are passed down through the generations are meant to teach lessons- like Greek & Roman mythology, and religious stories.

[Penelope]

Episcopals, Catholics, and Unitarian Universalists do not. I would also check the web pages of Evangelical Lutheran, Presbyterian, and United Church of Christ churches as well. In fact, I think there is a plethora of churches who do not take the bible literally. Your best bet would be to check out the statements of beliefs on the denominations home pages to see what is a good fit:)

 

Slightly OT but I don't think Unitarian Universalist is considered a Christian denomination.

 

I find that even most conservative denominations do not take every single thing literally. If they did, they would be keeping the Sabbath on Saturday, having women cover their heads, and giving all of their possessions away to follow Christ.

 

I think there tend to be hot-button issues where people claim they either read the Scriptures literally, or not. Creation is one, there is also women in ministry, marital submission, things like that. Some people would say parental discipline as well.

[nmoira]

 

I never met anyone who did take the bible literally until I started homeschooling. I was astounded.

I was raised Anglican and wasn't aware until my 20's that some people read the Bible literally.

[kpupg]

... but more and more I feel that I've got to leave my brain in the parking lot to enter the church building

 

This one of the million-and-forty-seven reasons I am glad to be Catholic.

 

The Catholic Church honors human reason (a gift from God) and reveres Scripture and the Church's teaching Tradition that flows from the Word. It all fits together perfectly. In fact, the Holy Father John Paul II wrote an entire encyclical entitiled "Fides et Ratio" -- "Faith and Reason." Gotta love it.

 

We believe that the Bible is the Word of God, but we are not required to believe that it is a science textbook. On the other hand, we are free to believe in 6 24-hour days of Creation if we choose.

 

God bless,

Karen

[LibraryLover]

Congregationalists?

 

Here's an interesting book on this very idea, written by a Congregationalist minister:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Saving-Jesus-Church-Worshiping-Following/dp/006156821X

[HRAAB]

This one of the million-and-forty-seven reasons I am glad to be Catholic.

 

The Catholic Church honors human reason (a gift from God) and reveres Scripture and the Church's teaching Tradition that flows from the Word. It all fits together perfectly. In fact, the Holy Father John Paul II wrote an entire encyclical entitiled "Fides et Ratio" -- "Faith and Reason." Gotta love it.

 

We believe that the Bible is the Word of God, but we are not required to believe that it is a science textbook. On the other hand, we are free to believe in 6 24-hour days of Creation if we choose.

 

God bless,

Karen

 

Yes, faith must be reasonable. Faith should not fly in the face of reason. I keep coming back to this constantly. But it does comes down to faith. If I remember correctly, although it's been a long time since I looked at that encyclical, JPII said in the end it is faith. While we can reason much of our faith, there are still those things that simply have to be accepted.

 

My bil believes that one must take the Bible literally. If you do not believe literally in the Genesis creation story, or that Jonah was in the belly of a fish for three days, then why can't the rest of the Bible just be a good story? His point is if those stories aren't absolute, literal truth, then the rest of the Bible is suspect. I absolutely disagree. Those stories contain a very deep, profound truth, but I do not for a minute believe I to accept them as literal. And that in no way invalidates what Christ did for us.

 

Janet

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

By Penelope Slightly OT but I don't think Unitarian Universalist is considered a Christian denomination.

 

I did think of that as well, but there are many Unitarians who are Christian:). So it actually is an option for Christians as well as many other faiths;).

[mommaduck]

Yes, but then there is the debate as to whether they are still holding to Christianity or just certain parts of it's traditions.

[Renee in NC]

I would agree with Catholics. I was raised CAtholic and was not really taught the typical Bible stories in school and the ones I was taught I was told merely illustrated a point. I was also taught evolution in Catholic school and nothing about Creationism.

 

 

 

Yikes - no, this is not Catholicism. I am not saying the flood didn't happen, but rather maybe there is a different reason it is in the Bible than historical fact. My children most certainly learn the Bible stories and that they are Truth. I just don't have enough wisdom or knowledge to pin down the timeline.:D

[mommaduck]

Yikes - no, this is not Catholicism. I am not saying the flood didn't happen, but rather maybe there is a different reason it is in the Bible than historical fact. My children most certainly learn the Bible stories and that they are Truth. I just don't have enough wisdom or knowledge to pin down the timeline.:D

 

From my understanding it depends on what diocese you are in. I have a friend that was also taught that the OT was just a bunch of fables, moral stories, but didn't really happen and that evolution is how the world was created. When I presented this to the Catholic Forum, I was immediately asked what diocese friend was in. When I said NY the immediate response was, "oh, well most of the church considers that diocese heretical or next to it":001_huh:

[Renee in NC]

Hmm...not sure I can agree with that. The Church teaches that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but it also teaches that the Holy Traditions passed down by the Church are important, too; IOW, that much of the Bible is sort of defined by Tradition. The Church defines what the Bible is; the Bible does not define what the Church is.

 

Exactly. I don't think that this means the same thing as the literalism that was taught to me when I was fundamentalist.

 

For example, I know of someone who used one word in one verse to determine that God never wanted a child to leave home unless it was to marry.

[Renee in NC]

From my understanding it depends on what diocese you are in. I have a friend that was also taught that the OT was just a bunch of fables, moral stories, but didn't really happen and that evolution is how the world was created. When I presented this to the Catholic Forum, I was immediately asked what diocese friend was in. When I said NY the immediate response was, "oh, well most of the church considers that diocese heretical or next to it":001_huh:

 

That's why I specify that the *Church* teaches this. There are preists and whole dioceses teaching heresy. For that matter, I was taught heresy in my RCIA class! It is really unfortunate when priests and bishops do not follow the teachings of the Church - they are leading people astray. My old diocese in NC was pretty bad, but now there is a very, very good bishop and things will change for the better. I am not sure about here, but I like the priest so far!

[mommaduck]

That's why I specify that the *Church* teaches this. There are preists and whole dioceses teaching heresy. For that matter, I was taught heresy in my RCIA class! It is really unfortunate when priests and bishops do not follow the teachings of the Church - they are leading people astray. My old diocese in NC was pretty bad, but now there is a very, very good bishop and things will change for the better. I am not sure about here, but I like the priest so far!

Right :001_smile: I was just tossing it out there because I've gotten into discussions with several ppl from these kinds of diocese and they declare that the Church is open to all this...yet, I've known some really strong Catholics that are very much up on what the Church, beyond the diocese, says. So it was just a clarification due to where the debates come from.

[Renee in NC]

Right :001_smile: I was just tossing it out there because I've gotten into discussions with several ppl from these kinds of diocese and they declare that the Church is open to all this...yet, I've known some really strong Catholics that are very much up on what the Church, beyond the diocese, says. So it was just a clarification due to where the debates come from.

 

Whenever I want to know what the Church teaches, I go to the Catechism (or something else with the Imprimatur) for that reason. The things that I have had *Catholics* tell me about what the Church believes are hard to believe sometimes.

[EmilyK]

Apologies for not reading all the previous posts -- I do think it depends on where you live, because a lot of diversity of belief is allowed. However, I have heard on good authority that most/all seminaries in the denoms I am about to list teach a nonliteral interpretation.

 

-- ELCUSA (Lutheran)

-- Episcopal

-- Methodist

 

I also know that my local UCC and Presbyterian churches are comfortable with a non literal interpretation. Ditto Catholic (and I went to a Catholic school for 6 years that never pushed a literal interpretation). Of course Unitarian and Unity.

 

I have a friend who lives nearby, but out in the country and she says most of the above denominations do imply a more literal interpretation, and she thinks it may be in part because that's what the members are more comfortable with.

 

If you are looking for authors, I can't recommend Marcus Borg enough. His "intro" book on the subject, "Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time," is great. And he's a wonderful writer and lecturer. I also really like John Dominic Crossan (Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography is his "big" work , but it is long, and he's done lighter versions; his autobiography, A Long Way from Tipperary is fun) and John Shelby Spong. I also really like Elaine Pagels, especially "Beyond Belief" and "The Gnostic Gospels."

[Denise in Florida]

I was raised Methodist, and they absolutely took the 6 day creation and flood literally--in our church anyway.

 

It might have been your local church or it might be a regional thing. The United Methodist Book of Discipline does not require agreement with either creation or evolution. The explanation is something along the lines of the Bible states who created the earth (God) but doesn't describe how. This is not a direct quote, just my best rememberance. :001_smile:

 

I think there are Methodists on both sides of the question.

[Audrey]

It might have been your local church or it might be a regional thing. The United Methodist Book of Discipline does not require agreement with either creation or evolution. The explanation is something along the lines of the Bible states who created the earth (God) but doesn't describe how. This is not a direct quote, just my best rememberance. :001_smile:

 

I think there are Methodists on both sides of the question.

 

 

I was raised United Methodist. Rumour had it that Free Methodists were literalists. I never cared enough to verify that one way or the other. Just saying that's what we were told then.

[TravelingChris]

We are not literalists when it comes to things like 6 day creation, young earth, etc. We are creationists, nonetheless and do believe in the Bible. We just don't believe that our modern way of thinking should cloud that people thousands of years ago had different ideas about storytelling and narration. It isn't lying, it is just seeing the importance of the story being the moral lesson rather than a history or science lesson.

 

Anyway, we don't join literalist churches that equate young earth ideas with salvation and we have had no problems in United Methodist, Presbyterian (including USA, Cumberland and now PCA), and military chapels. I know that a number of other denomninations hold similar views. In fact, I have never attended a church where young earth views were preached and almost all the people I have met who are 6 day creationists are homeschoolers. Its why now I won't have my kids attend science classes in any co-op except if I verified that the teacher was not a young earther. ( I thought a few years ago we would be safe with a food science class but I was wrong).

[mom2jjka]

 

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod)

 

 

I'm sorry, but you are confusing two very different churches here.

 

The ELCA is NOT the same thing as the Wisconsin synod Lutherans (WELS)

 

ELCA, as you stated, is very liberal, but the WELS, on the other hand is very conservative, and we DO absolutely believe that the Bible is to be taken literally.

[Marylou]

I guess I don't understand why taking the Bible literally = checking your brain at the door???

 

They are not equal. However with such overwhelming success and support of books like The God Delusion, we know that more and more people think it's okay to call those who believe the Bible literally as "deluded" and/or "unintelligent".

 

To the OP, you might be interested in Already Gone

[KarenNC]

I did think of that as well, but there are many Unitarians who are Christian:). So it actually is an option for Christians as well as many other faiths;).

 

Yes, there are Christian UU's (and it has its roots in several forms of Christianity) but that doesn't make UU a Christian denomination, any more than the presence of Jewish UUs makes it a Jewish sect, Hindu UUs makes it a branch of Hinduism or Wiccan UUs makes it a form of Wicca. It is a separate non-creedal religion.

 

"Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion that draws wisdom and inspiration from many sources. Unitarian Universalists include people who identify as Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Atheists, Agnostics, Humanists, and with other religious or philosophical traditions.

Although our congregations uphold shared principles, individual Unitarian Universalists may discern their own beliefs about theological issues. As there is no official Unitarian Universalist creed, Unitarian Universalists are free to search for truth on many paths.

To quote the Rev. Marta Flanagan, "We uphold the free search for truth. We will not be bound by a statement of belief. We do not ask anyone to subscribe to a creed. We say ours is a non-creedal religion. Ours is a free faith."----http://www.uua.org/visitors/beliefswithin/index.shtml

[OnTheBrink]

I am a Christian who understands the Bible literally, but I never, ever check my brain at the door. I find Bible study and the Christian life incredibly rigourous.:)

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[nmoira]

 

They are not equal. However with such overwhelming success and support of books like The God Delusion, we know that more and more people think it's okay to call those who believe the Bible literally as "deluded" and/or "unintelligent".

To be fair, the OP was describing her feelings about herself in this situation. I've read much stronger statements from some here about their thoughts about other branches of Christianity.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Yes, there are Christian UU's (and it has its roots in several forms of Christianity) but that doesn't make UU a Christian denomination, any more than the presence of Jewish UUs makes it a Jewish sect, Hindu UUs makes it a branch of Hinduism or Wiccan UUs makes it a form of Wicca. It is a separate non-creedal religion.

 

"Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion that draws wisdom and inspiration from many sources. Unitarian Universalists include people who identify as Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Atheists, Agnostics, Humanists, and with other religious or philosophical traditions.

Although our congregations uphold shared principles, individual Unitarian Universalists may discern their own beliefs about theological issues. As there is no official Unitarian Universalist creed, Unitarian Universalists are free to search for truth on many paths.

To quote the Rev. Marta Flanagan, "We uphold the free search for truth. We will not be bound by a statement of belief. We do not ask anyone to subscribe to a creed. We say ours is a non-creedal religion. Ours is a free faith."----http://www.uua.org/visitors/beliefswithin/index.shtml

 

:iagree::iagree: Especially since my dh and I have strong UU leanings and family members who are UU. I still think it is an option for Christians though even though UU's are non-creedal since UU's are free to be Christian;). It is not everyone's cup of tea though;)

[Marylou]

To be fair, the OP was describing her feelings about herself in this situation. I've read much stronger statements from some here about their thoughts about other branches of Christianity.

 

 

Right.

[Pip]

I'm sorry, but you are confusing two very different churches here.

 

The ELCA is NOT the same thing as the Wisconsin synod Lutherans (WELS)

 

ELCA, as you stated, is very liberal, but the WELS, on the other hand is very conservative, and we DO absolutely believe that the Bible is to be taken literally.

 

What I put in parentheses are the conservative branches of the other denominations. So the ELCA would be the liberal, and the WELS would be the literalist.

 

We are WELS.

[Pip]

Yikes - no, this is not Catholicism. I am not saying the flood didn't happen, but rather maybe there is a different reason it is in the Bible than historical fact. My children most certainly learn the Bible stories and that they are Truth. I just don't have enough wisdom or knowledge to pin down the timeline.:D

 

I am just sharing my experience. I know the Catholic church has some very Biblical based parishes. They don't just do rituals for rituals sake. I love ritual. That is partly why I am Lutheran. I know there are many, many Catholic churches that teach salvation through Grace and not works righteousness. so again, THIS IS MY EXPERIENCE. Actually, I find it very sad that so many people who grew up Catholic had a different experience than me.

 

My mother is a graduate of Trinity College, the women's college of Catholic University. She told me she found it "stunning" that people would take the Bible literally. My BIL attended seminary in Baltimore and 2 of his brothers are priests, one is a monsignior. None of them believe there was an actual flood or a 6 day creation. They do believe they are literary devices to illustrate a point.

 

I spent many years of my life in Baltimore which is heavily Catholic post-Vatican 2. I talk to friends who grew up in other parts of the country, especially the center, and they were given different ideas about the Bible, more literal. I often wonder if I suffered the results of the Catholic church trying to redefing and modernize itself after Vatican 2.

 

The priest who married dh and I , on hearing I was now Lutheran and a member of a conservative synod, told me to remember they tended to be more literal in their Biblical interpretation so I needed to take what they said with a grain of salt.

 

I was told in Catholic school not to read the Bible and leave it up to those who had been trained in it. The literary nuance would be difficult to understand. This was in high school.

 

My sister has put 3 children through catholic school and none of them were taught the old testament stories were real. I asked. She left the church they were in so they could find a more Biblically based Catholic church so she had something to back up what she was teaching her dc at home. Her dh was really wanted the kids to go to Catholic school.

 

My oldest sister had an elderly priest tell her that her son should not read the Bible for his Confirmation because church literature explained it bettter and would help him understand the analogies.. He told my dh her son should have loyalty to the church teachings and not rely on the Bible. That was a real struggle for her because her dh insisted the kids be confirmed.

 

My Catholic Bible, in the introduction to each New Testament book, says there is no evidence that any of the books were written by the people who the book is named for. So Matthew didn't write the Gospel of Matthew.

 

I was 28 years old before I found out Christ died on the cross for my sins, not just to open the door for the good people. I have told some of my very good Catholic relatives that and they think that is preposterous.

 

Again, this is my experience growing up in a family that has been Catholic for several generations.