Exposing the ELCA

Hi Jim,

Good to hear from you and I'm glad you wrote to share your thoughts. I think I would agree with you for the most part. The areas we may differ are on what are "Facts" and what are not. I am not wanted to argue with you either, just share my thoughts and hear yours. I do take the bible literally but that is different from what it sounds. If you dont mind I thought I would copy a paste a much smarter person than I, answer to taking the bible literally.

"Dear M., Thank you for contacting Answers in Genesis. I think you’ve misunderstood how we interpret the Bible. You incorrectly state that we take the Bible literally, which we don’t, although we understand that the events recorded in Genesis are literal history. Let me explain in more detail to avoid confusion.
The Bible gives us principles of interpretation in 2 Corinthians 4:2 and Proverbs 8:8–9:

Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God (2 Corinthians 4:2).
All the utterances of my mouth are in righteousness; There is nothing crooked or perverted in them. They are all straightforward to him who understands, And right to those who find knowledge (Proverbs 8:8–9).

In other words, we are to read and understand the Bible in a plain or straightforward manner. This is usually what people mean when they say “literal interpretation of the Bible” (this phrase is common among those not well-versed in hermeneutics). I try to use the term “plainly” so I don’t confuse people.
Reading the Bible “plainly” means understanding that literal history is literal history, metaphors are metaphors, poetry is poetry, etc. The Bible is written in many different literary styles and should be read accordingly. This is why we understand that Genesis records actual historical events. It was written as historical narrative, as outlined in Should Genesis Be Taken Literally?
Reading the Bible plainly/straightforwardly (taking into account literary style, context, authorship, etc.) is the basis for what is called the historical-grammatical method of interpretation which has been used by theologians since the church fathers. This method helps to eliminate improper interpretations of the Bible.
For example, I once had someone say to me (who was not a Christian), “the Bible clearly says “there is no God’ in Psalms 14:1.” When you look up the verse and read it in context, it says:

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good. (Psalm 14:1).

So the context helps determine the proper interpretation—that a fool was saying this.
I also once had someone tell me, “to interpret the days in Genesis, you need to read 2 Peter 3:8, which indicates the days are each a thousand years.” 2 Peter 3:8–9, in context, says:

But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:8–9)

This passage employs a literary device called a simile. Here, God compares a day to a thousand years in order to make the point that time doesn’t bind Him, in this case regarding His patience. God is not limited to the time He created—that would be illogical.
Also, this verse gives no reference to the days in Genesis, so it is not warranted to apply this to the days in Genesis 1. When read plainly, these verses indicate that God is patient when keeping His promises.
At any rate, I pray this helps to clarify why we advocate reading and understanding the Bible in a plain or straightforward manner, and why Genesis should be understood as actual history.
Kind regards in Christ,
Bodie Hodge, AiG–USA" - from this link http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2006/01/13/feedback-why-take-bible-literally

I apprieciate your thoughts Jim and am glad you felt comfortable writing to me. Hope you are doing well.

God bless,

Dan