Why do people take things written in holy books literally? Why can't they take them metaphorically?

A lot of the 'things' written in holy books are put forward as if they were actual histories of real events. Some of them have been verified; others have not. If you want all of these to be taken metaphorically, then you're going to have to explain why they are put forward as historical narratives, and what 'metaphor' they are supposed to be expressing. If -- as is often the case -- theists can't actually agree on what these stories are supposed to be a 'metaphor' of, then the argument that they must be a metaphor for something falls flat. On the other hand, if you want to claim that some of these are intended as historical narratives, and only some are metaphors, you need to explain how ordinary people can tell the difference. And you still have the other problem; if theists can't agree which ones are which, and what they are meant to be metaphors of, what reason do you have to claim they are metaphors at all?

A few points: It's a real question whether they're true or not.  Unless you've really done your scientific homework, making an intellectual decision as to the veracity of the texts is academically dishonest. A large percentage of people believe they have first hand confirmation from God or angels or whatever telling them some or all of it is to be taken literally.  Occam's Razor may argue that it's not the most likely answer, but that doesn't mean it's not internally coherent--possibly the second most likely answer.  And so when someone says God told them it's true, what can you say to them? Third, and perhaps most importantly, is that "a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things never has the power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation."  In other words, poetical books don't change lives, not in any substantial way.  They may inspire or even overwhelm in indescribable ways, but no one ever looked at a painting a decided to give up drugs or drinking.  Science books don't motivate people.  People on Quora may say a particular left-brained argument is pretty or elegant all day, but no has ever read a psychology book about the dangers of premarital sex and decided to quit.  Humans just aren't that rational.  So when you think about it, if you were God, you wouldn't just prove things mathematically for all to see, or it wouldn't help anyone transcend the bottom levels of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs to become happy.

Please excuse me for being late to the party.Well, I have a slightly different point to bring to the proverbial table. No matter whether verses are taken literally or metaphorically or with some other meaning, they are supposed to have some basic, universal meaning that everyone should be able to understand. This is because of the fact that the holy book that it comprises should easily communicate its message to all of humanity - that's kind of it's purpose.But more importantly, if this is the word of God (who is omnipotent), then He should have been able to create a book with words manipulated in such a way that nobody could ever misinterpret it. If this is not the case, then that would mean that the words of God aren't perfectly communicated to everyone, hence denying them of their infallibility. And if God's words aren't perfect enough for everyone to understand them, then those words mustn't be perfect. Then God mustn't be omnipotent. If said holy book was delivered by an all-powerful, all-knowing being then he would have been able to foresee how such ambiguous and misleading statements would be understood by future generations and the doubts and confusions they would cause. This alone should be reason to reject any claims to its divine authorship.  That's pretty much it.

Should the Bible be interpreted literally? Skeptics of the Bible often ask Christians: “You don’t take the Bible literally do you…??!” The question reveals an attitude of disbelief, an incredulity that anyone could actually believe that the Bible should be read as nonfiction literature. If the questioner knows anything about the Bible, sometimes he’ll try to bolster his case by asking follow-up questions like, “In John, Jesus says, ‘I am the door’ – is Jesus really a door?” or “In Psalms, the writer asks to take shelter under God’s wings – is God a bird, then?” This line of argumentation is known in logic as reductio ad absurdum, in which a proposition (or set of propositions) is refuted by showing that it leads to a logically absurd consequence. However, the fact of the matter is the literal-historical-grammatical method of biblical interpretation is the most logical. Its aim is to discover the meaning of the passage as the original author would have intended and what the original hearers would have understood. This interpretive approach embraces the fact that the Bible includes various genres (narrative, poetry, didactic teaching, etc.) and literary techniques (metaphors, hyperbole, etc.), but states that such things do not take away from the literalness of the Bible at all. In fact, these techniques are standard fare in nonfiction literature and used in everyday language to communicate truth. For example, the Bible uses what is called phenomenological language to describe everyday things in common speech. A case in point is found in the book of Joshua: "It came about at sunset that Joshua gave a command, and they took them down from the trees and threw them into the cave where they had hidden themselves, and put large stones over the mouth of the cave, to this very day" (Joshua 10:27). When the Bible mentions “sunset,” it doesn’t mean that the sun actually went down from a scientific perspective. Even today, meteorologists don’t say that “tomorrow’s earth rotation will make the sun disappear at 9 P.M.,” but speak of the “sunset.” The Bible also uses hyperbole–an obvious and intentional exaggeration–to communicate literal truth. An instance of hyperbole is found in the book of John: "So the Pharisees said to one another, ‘You see that you are not doing any good; look, the world has gone after Him’"(John 12:19). The literal truth behind this statement is that large numbers were following Jesus, a fact not hard to understand from reading the text. The Bible is also full of metaphors, figures of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not woodenly applicable in order to suggest a resemblance. For instance, Moses calls God “The Rock!” in Deuteronomy 32:3. Jesus calling Himself the door in John 10:9 is another illustration. His point was not that He was flat, rectangular, or swung on hinges, but that He was the way of entrance into the kingdom of God. Additionally, Scripture uses anthropomorphisms, which represent God in another form, or with other living attributes and affections: "Let me dwell in Your tent forever; Let me take refuge in the shelter of Your wings” (Psalm 61:4). The Bible also makes use of personification, which assigns a personal attribute to inanimate objects or abstract notions: “For you will go out with joy and be led forth with peace; the mountains and the hills will break forth into shouts of joy before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands" (Isaiah 55:12). Perhaps the most common literary technique causing some to reject its literalness involves symbolism. A couple examples of symbolism are found in this passage in Revelation: “In His [Jesus’] right hand He held seven stars, and out of His mouth came a sharp two-edged sword; and His face was like the sun shining in its strength” (Revelation 1:16). Is Jesus really holding stars in His hand, and is there really a sword in His mouth? Most times, the Bible explains its own symbolism. In the above case, the explanation is given of the seven stars a few verses later: "The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches” (Revelation 1:20). The thing to remember is that the symbol points to a literal object behind the figurative language. When the above truths are understood, it becomes much easier to embrace the fact that the literal-historical-grammatical method of biblical interpretation is the best and most obvious way to read and understand the Bible. The fact that figures of speech and other literary devices are used in Scripture in no way takes away from its nonfiction message. http://www.compellingtruth.org/Bible-interpreted-literally.html See also: What does it mean to believe the Bible literally? http://www.fredsbibletalk.com/qa004.html The Interpretation of Scripture  by James I. Packer  http://www.bible-researcher.com/packer1.html DISPENSATIONAL HERMENEUTICS: The Grammatico -Historical Method  http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/documents/articles/25/25.htm