Biblical Literalacy

Back at the beginning of the month, I spied and interesting title and read it: http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/01/dont-take-bible-literally-neither-anyone-else/ ....

Literalacy, is that even what the Bible was ever intended for?

The Bible is a collection of religious writings, written for the western oriental mind of millennia ago.  (I can already hear the howls!)

Now for the real howls! : No part of the Bible was written for Americans nor Europeans for that matter.  There is no evidence any part was even intended for the Greeks (at large)!  There uis stronger evidence that the New Testament was Aramaic, ot Hebrew, not Greek, not English, not German or any other claims.

We live in the results of a Greek culture - highly touted by philosophers and those happy with godless lives ...  Literalism is a product of this culture and its infestion into our educational systems!

So, the above link arguing that the Bible can not be taken literal - and it must be true - the examples used are laughable to our Greek poisoned minds ......  The Bible is not literal, so by extension we can be comfortable knowing it is not reliable either.  Comfortably discredited, we can now talk philosophically about the Bible and feel no compulsion to listen to its words.

But the Bible was written to the oriental mind, not a western one.  The language is pictorial not literal!  And this knowledge has already been know, just not popular to publish.  It took World War II to decimate the remaining Aramaic world to remind the world of what many "troubling" passages meant.  And no one listened..... the argument just recycles endlessly.

As for the article, it too flounders on the rocks of foolishness.
Of course God literally is not telling you to cut you hand off if you a thief.
God is not establishing a threat of hand losing.
God is not establishing hand loss as a purification act.
God does want you to not be a thief however.

Point by point the Aramaic would understand that the picture language of their culture - did not raise questions, as to the meaning, but rather as to truth to be followed.

The New Testament is filled with such examples.
The Old Testament is filled with such examples!
The language is picoral - symbolic - but it does have meaning for truth.

This means there were no dachshunds on Noah's ark, but dogs were.
There were no nails driven through Jesus' hands, the forearm is part of the "hand" to them.
Snakes do not talk, but Satan does.

How literal do you want?  Is the Holy Spirit a bird?  What kind of bird?  Do peoples tongues erpt in fire?  etc, etc, etc!

I am a literalist from the extent that I understand:
God is smarter than me
Aramaic languages are pictorial and truth must be discerened
And all truth is subject to all scripture

And I have tried to follow what I understand.
And I mess up quit literally.
Yup.

The Bible, remains before me, a tome of truth I have problems reading and connecting the dots.  The brain damage rules the day.  Yet, I continue to read, to study - two pages at a time! looking to apply literally what truths I find ...