Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Where does literalism end and interpretation begin?
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 1 of 96 (292771)
03-06-2006 2:25 PM


Ok... A topic that I would like biblical literalists to comment on.
Subject: Biblical Literalism.
this topic could well be the first of a number from me attempting to understand the extent of biblical literalism.. and an attempt to tease out from the literalists on here where EXACTLY literalism ends and interpretation begins...
As a start I'd like to concentrate on one word.
that word... "Heart"
the word heart appears many, many times in the bible
Genesis writes:
The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his HEART was only evil all the time
Exodus writes:
Then the LORD's anger burned against Moses and he said, "What about your brother, Aaron the Levite? I know he can speak well. He is already on his way to meet you, and his HEART will be glad when he sees you.
deuteronomy writes:
So if you faithfully obey the commands I am giving you today”to love the LORD your God and to serve him with all your heart
John writes:
whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.
revelations writes:
Give her as much torture and grief as the glory and luxury she gave herself. In her heart she boasts, 'I sit as queen; I am not a widow, and I will never mourn.'
the list goes on.
My point:
Everyone knows what a heart is right?
a bag of muscle that pumps oxygenated blood around the body
You do not feel with your heart
you do not think with your heart
it's a pump.
so, right from the getgo (Genesis) the word 'Heart' is used incorrectly. If I were a true literalist, I would believe that that little 4 chambered bag of muscle beating in my chest is the source of all my emotion, all my feelings, all my love.
we know this is not the case
To me a 'literalist' who does not believe this is already Interpreting the bible.
and thus.. is not a "literalist"
From Dictionary.com:
lit·er·al·ism (ltr--lzm)
n.
Adherence to the explicit sense of a given text or doctrine.
Literal portrayal; realism.
At what point and On what basis do biblical literalists stop taking the word of God literally?
this may seem... well.. Stupid I guess, but I really want to find where the transition between literal and interpreted lies.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Christian, posted 03-06-2006 2:49 PM Heathen has replied
 Message 37 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 8:18 AM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 4 of 96 (292781)
03-06-2006 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Christian
03-06-2006 2:49 PM


webster says
The seat of the affections or sensibilities, collectively or separately, as love, hate, joy, grief, courage, and the like; rarely, the seat of the understanding or will; - usually in a good sense, when no epithet is expressed; the better or lovelier part of our nature; the spring of all our actions and purposes; the seat of moral life and character; the moral affections and character itself; the individual disposition and character; as, a good, tender, loving, bad, hard, or selfish
Do you believe this to be true?
This message has been edited by Creavolution, 03-06-2006 03:09 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Christian, posted 03-06-2006 2:49 PM Christian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Christian, posted 03-06-2006 5:07 PM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 8 of 96 (292803)
03-06-2006 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Christian
03-06-2006 5:07 PM


Re: webster says
So you would agree that when reading the bible, you 'interpret' this word?.. i.e. you don't take it literaly.
because people in those times didn't know much of neuroscience, they very likely thought that the source of blood (as they saw it) was also the source of conciousness. understandable, they had no way to know otherwise. God didn't include a workshop manual in an appendix of the bible did he?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Christian, posted 03-06-2006 5:07 PM Christian has not replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 10 of 96 (292809)
03-06-2006 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by nwr
03-06-2006 5:20 PM


This is the beginning of my point wrt Literalism.
Straight off there is an assumption being made about the meaning of the word 'heart' in the bible.. an interpretation.
the purpose of this thread is to find out how far literalists take little interpretations like that before cutting off and accepting it as written.
I picke 'heart' as a starting point, something which quite obviuosly can have a dual meaning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by nwr, posted 03-06-2006 5:20 PM nwr has not replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 18 of 96 (292937)
03-07-2006 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
03-06-2006 9:07 PM


faith writes:
attack on literalism
this is not an attack.. read the OP

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 03-06-2006 9:07 PM Faith has not replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 19 of 96 (292948)
03-07-2006 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Christian
03-06-2006 5:09 PM


christian writes:
Not interpreting an object. Interpreting a word. The word "heart"
So, the word is being interpreted, (as one would expect, after all it has to be)
I am begining to form an opinion that it is impossible to take the bible literally. there is, was and will be a level of Interpretation involved. I want to find out where this level is.
Can anyone definitively state what the understanding was, in biblical times, of the function, composition, and capabilities of the Heart and the brain?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Christian, posted 03-06-2006 5:09 PM Christian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 12:21 PM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 21 of 96 (292965)
03-07-2006 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by robinrohan
03-07-2006 12:21 PM


Agreed.
every text has to be interpreted.
We all know the bible is interpreted in many different ways, sometimes a little, sometimes a lot.
It's just a matter of knowing when to stop interpreting. and read as written.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 12:21 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by ramoss, posted 03-07-2006 1:35 PM Heathen has replied
 Message 23 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 1:41 PM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 24 of 96 (292990)
03-07-2006 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by ramoss
03-07-2006 1:35 PM


That was going to be anoter issue to focus on...
Firstly we see interpretation within a single language, from little things like dual meanings of words ('Heart' for instance),
next step is when these word are put together into prose. Another layer in interpretation can be applied.
Further to this, the context of a chapter/verse/ entire book can affect the word as read.
And as you mention... start translating the thing into many different languages and there's a whole new level of possibilities for misunderstanding and mis-translation
I appreciate there will be a call to back up the above points with examples... I will try, But I have nothing close to encyclopaedic knowledge of the bible so don't get your hopes up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by ramoss, posted 03-07-2006 1:35 PM ramoss has not replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 25 of 96 (292996)
03-07-2006 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by robinrohan
03-07-2006 1:41 PM


robin writes:
To "interpret" just means to figure out what a text means. One can "interpret" a passage literally or figuratively.
But different people can/will interpret a passage differently no?
Some people Interpret Genesis as a creation myth.. a folk tale.. kind of a "how a camel got its humps" type story
Others Believe the story to be true as written, but "Interpret" on a smaller scale (macro?.. micro?)... like the meaning of God's refusal of Cain's sacrifice or was there othe human life at the time of Adam and Eve... or whether or not there really was free will etc. etc.
at what point does a literalist cease to be a literalist? what 'level' of interpretation takes you beyond the bounds of literalism?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 1:41 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 03-07-2006 2:03 PM Heathen has replied
 Message 27 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 2:07 PM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 29 of 96 (293009)
03-07-2006 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Faith
03-07-2006 2:03 PM


Faith writes:
someone who reads the Bible as it presents itself, literal where it presents itself as literal, parable where it presents as parable, metaphor where metaphor and so on -- according to what its writers intended. There is really very little controversy about how the Bible presents itself.
Ok... So for instance.. why do so few (any?)christians live be levitican laws? these laws were given by God, no?
Faith writes:
So for instance, the first chapters of Genesis and the book of Jonah are treated as parables or metaphors, not because there is any clue in the Bible itself that anything other than literal history was intended, but just because the critic can't accept what it actually says.
When the bible mentions 'Heart' in the emotional context "..his heart will be hardened.." etc.
The reader makes a decision to read that in the understanding that 'Heart' here has a particular meaning. To read it any other way (i.e. in the factual sense of a organ that pumps blood around the body) would be wrong. I, the critic, cannot accept what it actually says in this case. and thus interpret the meaning to be acceptable to me.
Is this not similar (albeit on a different magnitude)to reading Genesis, feeling that it does not make sense to believe it as literal truth, and thus 'interpret' the book as being an illustrative tale?
Or.. to take it back a step... could I interpret God's refusal of cain's sacrifice as meaning that he doesn't particularly like vegetarians? to under stand God's purpose here we have to interpret this story, whether we interpret the whole thing as a metaphor or accept it a a real happening but interpret the message depends on the reader.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 03-07-2006 2:03 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 03-08-2006 11:31 AM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 31 of 96 (293048)
03-07-2006 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by robinrohan
03-07-2006 2:07 PM


robin writes:
People interpret the parts of the US constitution differently too, but the US Constitution contains no parables as far as I know.
yes.. not sure what point you are trying to make here..
robin writes:
The literalist might say that if there is no indication that the passage was intended non-literally--or let's say non-historically-- then the passage is to be interpreted as historical fact.
I don't doubt that there are parts of the bible that are clearly parables, or clearly metaphors. But there are parts which read like fairly tales(Notably: genesis, jonah, Noah) without the explicit designation as parable or metaphor.
Does the absence of such an explicit designation imply that it is to be taken as historical truth?
Or is it explicitly designated as historical truth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 2:07 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 4:15 PM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 33 of 96 (293074)
03-07-2006 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by robinrohan
03-07-2006 4:15 PM


robin writes:
But I would think that any reading, literal or not, is a form of interpretation.
You can ask a hundred different people to read something, and you will get the same result.
ask a hundred different people what the words mean to them, and you could get a hundred different answers. they will have different interpretations of the words they have read
robin writes:
For example, we can interpret it based on what we think the writer's intentions were. Or we can interpret a text based not on the writer's intentions but what we think the text means apart from the author's intentions. Maybe the author said something he did not intend. Nonetheless it's part of the text.
The basis on which you make an interpretation is not really what I'm getting at.
more the amount or level of interpretation applied.
robin writes:
I'm curious as to the features of Genesis that can be called fairy-tale-like
-the creation of the entire universe in 7 days
-man being created from dirt
-woman being created from man
-no death, no disease, no pain
-a talking snake
to name but a few.
< edit: This should not be dragged off course to a discussion about Genesis, if you want to dicuss that please open a new thread >
This message has been edited by Creavolution, 03-07-2006 05:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by robinrohan, posted 03-07-2006 4:15 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 6:31 AM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 38 of 96 (293226)
03-08-2006 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by robinrohan
03-08-2006 6:31 AM


robin writes:
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth . . ." is not the same kind of comment as, "Once upon a time there was this old and very powerful wizard who hankered for companionship . . ."
If you think it's the same sort of thing, you have begged the question by assuming the automatic falsehood of special creation ahead of time.
well I honestly don't think there's that much difference between
there being a lonely God who wanted to share creation with
and there being a lonely wizard who hankered for companionship.
swap the words God and Wizard and there we go. Much in the same was other religions believe the universe sits on top of a turtles back.. you believe your wizard (God) picked up some dirt from the ground and created adam(why would he do this? why wouldn't he simply will some atoms into being and create Adam)
I haven't assumed falsehood, rather I have not assumed it to be truth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 6:31 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 10:43 AM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 40 of 96 (293244)
03-08-2006 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by robinrohan
03-08-2006 8:18 AM


Re: Problems with the OP
I really didn't intend this to become a discussion on the meaning of 'interpret'. i would have thought my understanding of the word and the context in which I use it here was clear from the OP.
robin writes:
Let's take the word "STOP" found on the highway. What does this mean?
Uhm... it means "Stop" no confusion there.
You can of course read the highway code to find out what to do after you stop.. it's quite clear and unequivocal
robin writes:
Take the word "window." Window--a hole in the side of a house. Another meaning is a spacetime window through which a spacecraft must pass to come to earth safely. Is one literal and the other figurative? Neither deal with abstractions.
Indeed, and when we read such a word we make a decision to apply a specific meaning to that word. It is possible, depending on the context, that two people could indeed read two different meanings for this word. for instance:
"I looked through the window and saw far away stars"
How do you understand that sentance?
robin writes:
What was the original meaning of the word "heart"? It might have been "the inner self, located in the chest." In that case, the later meaning of blood-pump would be figurative.
So If the original meaning of Heart was "the inner self, located in the chest." It's wrong isn't it? your 'self' does not reside in the chest, the pump does. so when we read this we understand that it is not meant literally, and thus we make a judgement as to the meaning of the written word, so as it fits with our logic, our (greatly improved)understanding of physiology and the human body.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 8:18 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 10:51 AM Heathen has replied
 Message 54 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 2:33 PM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 41 of 96 (293247)
03-08-2006 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by robinrohan
03-08-2006 10:43 AM


iano writes:
The difference is that "God" designates the creator whereas "wizard" does not
As you define them maybe..
what if we met another culture who believe that in the beginning there was nothing, then 'Wizard' said "Let there be Light"?
On the face of it we have two stories, one about a lonely God, the other about a lonely wizard. Both fantastical, both full of magic, Both very difficult to believe given our current understanding of the universe and its mechanisms.
again, this is heading Off Topic. I did not intend this thread to dicuss whether or not the bible is full of fairy stories. It is intended to discove the extent of Literalism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by robinrohan, posted 03-08-2006 10:43 AM robinrohan has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024