|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Where does literalism end and interpretation begin? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
robin writes:
You're not understanding me, your responses are exactly the reason I write this thread... Maybe they meant it quite literally Maybe they meant it literally, maybe they did not. You choose to put whetever meaning you feel fits onto that word. that is your choice. but it is a choice you make. and it is a choice that will affect the meaning of the word. So maybe you can clear it up then?Does a Biblical literalist read the bible 'literally' as per the meanings of the words in todays world? Or does He/She read the bible 'literally' as per the meanings of the words at the time of writing? (I would have though correct translation/transcription should have taken care of that dilemma) Is it somewhere in between? where do you decide which meaning fits? and on what basis do you make this decision
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
faith writes:
Where does it say this?
NT tells us that those laws no longer apply to us. faith writes:
they didnt, it was in my opening post. I don't understand how my remarks about the early chapters of Genesis and the book of Jonah being dismissed as literal got you to the question about the meaning of "heart" This message has been edited by Creavolution, 03-08-2006 11:51 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
robin writes:
'You' decide.... in the case of 'Heart' we can probobly agree to the intended meaning. but it is not so clear cut in other areas. In the case of "heart," you decide what best fits the contextWho decides then? who is right? robin writes:
Literal with repect to modern understanding of the word or literal with respect to ancient understnding of the word?
We can as well call it literal
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
faith writes:
So Paul has authority to override God in respect to the Law? it says it in all Paul's discussions of freedom from the Law; it says it wherever it discusses Old Testament "types" of the Messiah; it says it in Jesus' affirmation that He came to fulfill the Law, in the overall context. Could you point me towards passages/verses? I am genuinely interested to read where levitical laws are rendered obsolete. Does this mean that levitican teaching with regard to homosexuality is also overidden? "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." Lev 18:22 faith writes:
I was simply continuing the thread on topic wrt the opening post.
Well, you put it in your post to me where one would normally expect an answer to those remarks to be.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
Ok... I concede my choice of words could possibly have been better...
But semantics aside, do you at least get the point of the question? Do you understand what it is I am trying to find out here? Where is the cutoff point at which the word begins to lose it's original meaning, (if such a thing can be known), and begins to reflect more, the personality of the reader/interpreter?
robin writes:
So, You are saying a biblical literalist must interpret what is written in the bible? to what extent? All reading is interpretation what sets an allegorical tale apart from a supposed truth?there are certainly different people who interpret the bible differently, and have differing views on what is metaphor and what is truth. Simply saying "once upon a time" does not necessarily mark a story as a fable.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
robin writes:
How do you interpret a 'stop' sign? If we turn to the highway code, we will find that we have to interpret the explanations I believe the highway code is very clear on how to behave on the road. so as to avoid precisely the mis-interpretation we see with the bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
faith writes:
I'm not aware the ten commandments have anything to say about homosexuality
the ten commandments which include condemnation of sexual sin including homosexual sin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
robin writes:
Agreed. What interpretation involves is a judgement about the meaning based on certain assumptions and whatever evidence there is.so.. by your own definition, Everyone who reads the bible makes a judgement about the meaning based upon certain assumptions and whatever evidence there is. In my eyes that leave it wide open to misinterpretation. That leaves a big question mark over the truth of the word. So... two biblical literalists could concievable have differing views as to the teaching and meaning of the bible?
robin writes:
I would suggest that "in the beginning" remains rather undefined. "once upon a time" suggests an unidentified time and place.the beginning of what? the beginning of God? the beginning of time? does this then suggest that this is a fable?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
faith writes:
Firstly... this is exactly the type of Interpretation i had in mind when I opened this thread. what, exactly, tells you that this commandment refers to all sexual sin? Thou shalt not commit adultery includes all kinds of sexual sin Secondly By your logic if a gay married couple were to engage in sex it would be ok? (or is there a separate commandment forbidding gay marriage?)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
faith writes:
can you please back this up with a quote?
Marriage is between a man and a woman, according to Jesus and according to Genesis. faith writes:
Why?
If marrying a divorced person is adultery, as Jesus said, then certainly two gays marrying is adultery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
faith writes:
I'm simply asking you to back up your assertions with relevant quotes. If you don't know the Bible well enough to know what Jesus said about adultery your question about where to draw the line on interpretation just requires way too much of your discussants. seems fair to me. If you can't back up the point you are trying to make you should ask yourself on what basis you believe it to be true. I won't ask any more of you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
ramoss writes:
But doesn't specifically state that Man-Man or Woman-Woman is wrong? the comment about man being given a wife made out of his side (the hebew could mean either side or rib), does indicate that a man and wife is the ideal. So does something become evil simply because it is not specifically mentioned as Ideal in the bible?I would have thought it would have been specifically pointed out as in levitican law (which we have learned in message 46 and message 49 was overuled by Paul(and Jesus?)) ramoss writes:
But other bible passages cleary state that a woman should be subservient. I personally prefer the translation of 'SIDE' instead of 'RIB', because it indicates an equality (side by side) in a marriage, rather than a woman being in a subserviant role. Another case where "interpretation" can change the meaning?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024