There is a set of guidelines for Literalistic interpretation.
Take what you read and consider it in the context of the sentence before it and the one after it.
Then the paragraph before it and the one after it.
Then the Book in order before it, and the one after it.
In other words, the procedure assumes that the Bible explains itself fully and REQUIRES no additional outside information for full understanding. It doesn't exclude outside sources. Just that none are required.
You might believe that this is the
right way to read the Bible, but I cannot see how it's a definition of what it is to read something
literally.
Even assuming that by reading the Bible alone, and without reference to knowledge extrinsic to it, I would learn enough about human and avian anatomy and the limits of the biologically possible to interpret what is meant by the phrase "thou hast doves' eyes", is it not clear that the correct interpretation would in fact be non-literal?
You have taken a phrase out of context.
My FIRST interpretation,
the one that will give me the most insight,
is to assume "the speaker" is talking to "a dove " and I may not yet know what a "Dove" is. (I don't know what a "Turtle Dove" is. )
I will assume the speaker is talking to a dove until I read the content before and the content after the phrase. But holding
on to the most literal interpretation of the content will always
reveal more about what is intended, than automatically dismissing the most obvious meaning and jumping on to
"What ANY idiot can see is the REAL meaning, especially in light of....":
The modern age
Modern Man
What I read in a forum
What I heard on TV
A Law that was passed
What I heard on the radio
What they say at TalkOrigins.com
What the Newspaper said this morning
If you go the OTHER way, the process is the same.
What is that word in the Greek?
Where is that Greek word used and what did that Greek word
mean in the other places it was used. Same process. Start from where you are and work outwords.
Now, If you assume the bible is a collection of stories from 40 authors, handed down by word of mouth over countless generations until the original story is completely reshaped, then its natural to question each sentence and assume it's only vaguely related to the original intent and immediately begin guessing at its actual meaning.
Sorry, I didn't really answer your question.
RE: the phrase "thou hast doves' eyes", is it not clear that the correct interpretation would in fact be non-literal?
Maybe. I don't know the context. Even then, it won't qualify as "a fact."
When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise. (David L. Cooper, The World’s Greatest Library Graphically Illustrated. Los Angeles: Biblical Research Society, 1970)
-Sky-
Edited by Sky-Writing, : No reason given.
Edited by Sky-Writing, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2