Do you as Christians adhere to literal or symbolic interpretation of Bible?

many follow a literal interpretation (but only when it suits them). others interpret the bible in a symbolic way

In some of the examples you have cited, you're making the error that there must be a natural explanation for them or they couldn't have occurred. In the study of science ~ There are many difficulties, yet you assume explainability for them. Many things are indeed explainable, and research is continued over controversy. In the study of The Bible ~ There are many difficulties, and we assume explainability for them. Many things are Indeed explainable, and research is continued over controversy. However, critics of The Bible are not fair-minded as they presume it to be guilty of error instead of innocent. They confuse our fallible interpretations of it with Gods infallable revelation. There are no scientific or historical errors in The Bible ~ none! The Genesis account is not symbolic. Neither is the flood nor is the story of Jonah. Even though the big bang theory remains unproven and it can't answer questions like ~ where did all the matter come from in the first place ~ evolutionists and atheists alike are quite content to believe it anyway. So why is it so hard to believe that God spoke everything into existence? If he is the creator of all things could he not cause Jonah to survive in the belly of a fish? As for Jesus' miracles and his resurrection, there were many eye witnesses to these things. It takes about 2 generations or 80 years for a myth to develop ~ long after the eyewitnesses to the accounts have died. But the Apostles began teaching immediately, and the first letters to the churches contained in The New Testament were written about 30 or 40 years after Jesus ascended into Heaven. It's pretty hard to propagate a myth while the eyewitnesses are still alive. Not only that, but there are over 5,700 manuscripts that prove the authenticity of the New Testament alone. Most ancient books have only one or two. Such is the case with Alexander The Great, and nothing was even written about him until 500 years after his death.

One should not take it literally, but needs to read between the lines and find the inspired word, or the spiritual meaning of the passage. In this age we must learn of things to come while we are yet seemingly material ourselves, and so the bible has to use material things to express spiritual ideas. So one must always dig for the spiritual meaning of passages, or the lesson will be lost.

I take the Bible literally where it is meant to be taken literally. It also contains metaphors, similes, and analogies. Common sense, proper understanding of the context of a given passage and understanding the character of God goes a long way in knowing which is which. Obviously, Jesus would never advocate physically harming ourselves, that would be against His character.

From Matt. 5:29:

1. Pluck it out ... - It cannot be supposed that Christ intended this to be taken literally. His design was to teach that the dearest objects, if they cause us to sin, are to be abandoned; that by all sacrifices and self-denials we must overcome the evil propensities of our nature, and resist our wanton imaginations. Some of the fathers, however, took this commandment literally. Our Saviour several times repeated this sentiment. See Mat_18:9; Mar_9:43-47. Compare also Col_3:5.

It is profitable for thee - It is better for thee. You will have gained by it.

One of thy members perish - It is better to deny yourself the gratification of an evil passion here, however much it may cost you, than to go down to hell forever.

Thy whole body should be cast into hell - Thy body, with all its unsubdued and vicious propensities. This will constitute no small part of the misery of hell. The sinner will be sent there as he is, with every evil desire, every unsubdued propensity, every wicked and troublesome passion, and yet with no possibility of gratification. It constitutes our highest notions of misery when we think of a man filled with anger, pride, malice, avarice, envy and lust, and with no opportunity of gratifying them forever. This is all that is necessary to make an eternal hell.

It’s like this… when you like a passage as is, take it absolutely literally; when you don’t then it must be understood symbolically (and you must somehow make it say what you like), and when you can’t do anything with it – neither literally nor symbolically -- just leave it alone and pray to the holy spirit for understanding.

It depends on the doctrine. Most denominations rationalize their rules according to what they want to do, not what the Scripture says, but, that's just about all you'll here them say when confronted with something that might have to do with Tradition is "It's not in the Bible" This mentality does not make sense to me.

St. Thomas Aquinas said that we should always look for the literal first, but not at the expense of the obviously allegorical.

I am a Thomist. Proudly so.

i have been studying this and I love this question. My personal conviction is that the WORD of GOD requires the HOLY SPIRIT to understand its mysteries.. that is one reason why it is so confusing to many. And it also explains religious confusion. so in answer to your question, I believe the historical sections are mostly literal, like Samson"s hair was long .. but the understandings of GOD, like the sanctuary system , the LAMB of GOD, the 10 commandments, and receiving the HOLY SPIRIT ARE SPIRITUAL UNDERSTANDINGS, AS WELL AS faith, grace living as JESUS did, and so on..

Jesus also said "I am the vine you are the branches" - He's not literally a vine nor am I literally a branch. Some things, such as the parables, are figurative - others are literal.

If it is God's will to do these things, yes. The body is not the issue, the soul is. The body does not cause you to sin, your mind causes you to sin. You can do nothing physically to satisfy God. God has done everything for us.