A literal interpretation of the bible is a mistake and can lead to many contradictions.
So you are saying that God is congenitally incapable of making himself understood?
If so, you have this "Manual for Life" (the Bible) that may as well be written in Chinglish and yet, and yet we are supposed to follow it?
When Protestants broke away from the Church at or after the reformation they rejected the Church's authority to interpret scripture and in most cases they claimed that the bible was the only authority ('sola scriptura').
This position of the Protestants was a ridiculous one because a book can never have authority over a church which produced that book.
Your description of the history is correct, but your conclusion is flawed: No - it was not stupid at all. Look at the crimes of the "Catholic Church". Look at the way they interpreted the Bible and still do - how is their
interpretation any better or worse than a Protestant one, where the Protestant believes we can speak to God directly and have Him answer our questions? How were the College of Cardinals getting their messages?
And look how many times the Catholic Church changed its mind on what God thought.
The Bible is a book which sets out some of the history of Judaism
and the formation of the Christian Church.
It ends well before that time.
It is a very useful and enlightening book but any attempts to interpret it literally will in many cases lead to very serious misunderstanding.
Is there a version of the Bible that is clearer? E.g. one where these "non-literal passages" are marked out? No, there isn't... and why not? Because the whole thing is the work of some deluded and poorly informed men telling a story that had been Chinese Whispered down through the ages and trying to make sense of it in a way that would earn them the most money from the poor and ignorant.
The Bible was written by men and thus is influenced by all the limitations of those men. Each of them wrote to the best of his ability with his knowledge and understanding at the time but that understanding was limited. The Church on the other hand continues to improve its understanding as it evolves and will explain the meaning and relevance of bible passages as and when it sees fit for the guidance of its followers.
This paragraph contradicts itself - first you say the Bible is the work of limited intellects, then you say the interpretation is also the work of man - i.e. limited intellects and, more to the point, limited intellects with an axe to grind.
Now, the wording 'jealous God' used by the OT writer is a human metaphor as an attempt to describe God's attitude.
Either you are lying or sadly extremely mistaken. The Bible alleges that many of the following, in which God is "jealous" are said by God Himself and are certainly allegedly carved in tablets of stone by Moses who got it straight from God.Ex:20:5: Ex:34:14: Ex:20:5: Ex:34:14: De:4:24: De:5:9: De:6:15: Jos:24:19: De:5:9: De:6:15: Jos:24:19:
Whenever God's attitude is described by man, metaphor is involved because the writer is trying to describe a complex concept in a way that humans can understand and even in a way that the writer himself can understand.
This is a failure of logic - God speaks to a man... that man then tries to tell what God said to other men... but fails because it is so complex... then how did the first man understand?
The teaching of the Church (on the other hand) is that there is only one God and that creating other gods is not only foolish but will lead to harm for the followers and their descendants.
Firstly, it is abundantly apparent that there are many other gods, and Yahweh recognised that fact - the other gods are named and shamed in the Bible - on one occasion another god defeats Yahweh... but then you are a Catholic and will never have read a bible in your life, and so will not know this.
It is AS IF a jealous God was punishing those who worship other gods but this is a metaphor for the mess that you will get yourself (and your families) into if you make up an alternative (and therefore fake) god and alternative (fake) teachings and alternative (fake) religious practices.
There is no suggestion that other gods are fake gods - please provide some evidence of this wild statement.
You have wasted a lot of time trotting out the dogma of the Church of Rome - a dogma that, it must be said, is no better or worse than the general run of the mill apologists - basically, all you are saying is believe what I believe and TBH, there is not the slightest shred of evidence that you are not deluded in your belief system and much to suggest you are.2 Chronicles 15:13 Whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
John 15:6 "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned."
2 Thessalonians 1:8 "In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:"