Hyperbole in the Bible

quote:

---

Genesis 5 was not the basis for agreeing that Noah's exaggerated age might not be a true hyperbole as it is used in the story. His age doesn't make a point concerning the story.

---

And yet your reasons all refer to "ages", plural, not just to Noah's age. And your explanation of "gaps" clearly can't work for Noah's age alone. It is clear that the ages of the Patriarchs given in Genesis 5 ARE relevant to your conclusion.

quote:

---

As for the rainbow question, if you have a verse you feel I would consider to be hyperbole, please provide the verse.

---

And yet another evasion. I simply asked whether you considered the creation of the Rainbow to my literal truth, hyperbole or myth. And I gave you the verses way back at the start of the thread. Genesis 9:13-14 Are you going to answer the question ?And while you're at it, you can explain why you feel that a "later addition" should not be considered to be hyperbole, becuase you still haven't defended that argument.

Wow .. fo' realz? The issues of Babe's situation aside, have you forgotten the Superman example also?Regardless, as it's been pointed out already, the general context of the Genesis booklet already caused you to concede at least one point of debate. We know your view of Noah's age is arrived at through higher academic criticisms, rather than the natural context of the narrative. There's nothing particularly odd about that (i.e. apology through projection, etc.).As we've come to learn, providing a theme of excess as a built-in feature of a written work may tend to prevent the practical or successful use of hyperbole, as well as the ability to recognize it. But even if you believe the context of the narrative did not sway your change of mind, are you seriously arguing context is unable to determine how seeming exaggerations may be revealed as neither excessive in magnitude or hyperbole?If so, please take a sec to explain why context is irrelevant towards determining hyperbole. I'd encourage you to reread the posts in this thread if that's all you've seen so far.We've been discussing the role of hyperbole. Please, make sure you're eyes are open when ya do it tho cuz it works much mo' betta that way Seriously, the context of a narrative may present how something you've shared couldn't easily classify as hyperbole, providing you don't disregard it or project an alternative.We've employed more definitive non-biblical examples to better understand how hyperbole operates, then considered how we may apply what we've learned to the more challenging texts. I'm clearly not the one providing bare links, much less have I presented any examples without the courtesy of at least a crude analysis.You've claimed the ages in Genesis are exaggerated when compared to reality, blatantly discounting many possibilities the author may intend the reader consider as a function of the story (i.e. people used to maintain longer life spans, etc). Considering the booklets subjective nature, there may be 'lil sense in further attempting to examine potential hyperbole.At least 'til we can properly understand the limitations of the technique. Pd, this is nonsense I'm afraid. Yes, God saw that the wickedness of mankind was great. And how great was it? Great enough to kill everyone but a handful, so let's not put the cart before the horse ..Rather, he saw every intention was so only evil so continually, that the wickedness of man was great in the earth.It wasn't so great that their thoughts were consequently evil 24/7 - but rather, the evil was consequently 'so' great because their thoughts were evil 24/7. It's a distinct yet subtle difference I'd say. Intentions lead to consequences ..I'm just kiddin' (kinda) Honestly though, at first glance this verse appears a bit more like a simple idiom to me which gets back to being familiar with the customs of the language (i.e. 'the beginning of his strength, and, the firstborn of the bountiful harvest etc.)'.Why believe the statements are meant to be taken as cause and effect, rather than parallel's forming a Hebrew idiom? Better yet - what does? Please, start showing your work .. which expression is developing the potential for hyperbole? For example, which word do you feel's providing a sense of exaggeration we must apply the scope of magnitude to:

• 'great' (i.e. .. wickedness of man was great ..)
• 'every' (i.e. .. every intention ..)
• 'only' (i.e. .. only evil ..)
• 'continually' (i.e. .. evil continually ..)

One Love

quote:

---

No, you have not answered this.
You can tell that you have not answered this by the number of people in this thread asking you to describe how you are deciding if things are hyperbole or not.

---

Message 52People also look at examples of various types of hyperbole. This gives them a feel for what a hyperbole entails. I provided links with examples.You provided a verse and I told you why I considered it hyperbole. Message 64. I stated in the OP that words like all, everything, and forever can signal hyperbole.Your turn. How is hyperbole determined in any other book we read?

quote:

---

You are claiming that the verse is not fact, but when asked to explain your claim, you say "Prove it is fact!".
If your intention in this thread was to say "The following bible phrases are hyperbole. Prove me wrong!" then I think you are shifting the burden of proof to the wrong people.

---

I didn't ask you to prove anything. If you disagree with my position then, yes, the burden is on you to present and support your position. If you disagree that a verse is hyperbole, then you need to explain why it isn't and provide support. I have explained why I feel the verses I've shared are hyperbole and I've provided links. Just because you don't like my explanations or links doesn't mean I haven't explained or supported what I've said.

quote:

---

But you are the one who is meant to present a position.
And since you are reluctant to do so, I am finding it difficult to debate that position with you.

---

I presented my position in Message 1. Then I've shared verses I consider to contain hyperbole. So my position concerning the verses I share is that they contain hyperbole. I don't share verses I don't feel contain hyperbole. Again that means my position concerning the verses I share is that they contain hyperbole.If someone disagrees with me and feels that the verses I shared are fact, that means their position is that the verse does not contain hyperbole. My position is that the verse contains hyperbole. I only need to provide support and reasoned argumentation for my position concerning the verses I share. Now you know, my position concerning the verses I share is that they contain hyperbole. Those who consider it fact will have to provide their own support and reasoned argumentation since my position is that the verses I've shared contain hyperbole.One last time: My position concerning the verses I share is that they contain hyperbole.

Ok - Let's looks at the first one you provided:

quote:

---

2 Kings 18:5 - Hezekiah trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him.

​

2 Kings 23:25 - Neither before nor after Josiah was there a king like him who turned to the LORD as he did--with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his strength, in accordance with all the Law of Moses.

---

Your claim:The fact that people use similar exaggerations does not mean that these verses are exaggerations. Your argument is: the bible contains hyperbole and the bible shouldn't contain contradictions therefore any contradictions are probably hyperbole.
But there is no evidence relating to specific verses: you are left with nothing but 'wishful thinking' assertions.If you do not have anything solid to support your claim that those particular verses aren't simply contradictions then there is nothing to discuss.
All you are doing is stating a subjective opinion.

If you read on, he and I took a closer look in Message 49 and Message 50 concluding it was hyperbole. In all fairness, he never actually said it wasn’t. We noticed hyperbole can exist within metaphor.I agree the camel’s an exaggeration of what can be swallowed. Yet, I don’t see where the audience is led to believe it’s a stand up comedy routine. IMO the story doesn’t seem to indicate the speaker’s pitchin’ jokes, but rather that a sense of irony’s being employed to provoke serious thought. Perhaps even a hue of silliness to soften the blow ..I’d argue there’s certainly comparison being made between the camel and gnat.Apparently, there's even some evidence suggesting a pun of sorts in Aramaic between camel and gnat, or louse, from the Aramaic kalma. Regardless, as you said, straining gnats was common to the day. However, one can be swallowed relatively painlessly - the other’s a ridiculous thing to consider you could swallow without noticing. Enter, irony ..Could someone with alleged diligence perform in their work, yet miss something so obvious?What could possibly lead to such folly and how does one insure they avoid a similar fate?We create metaphors when we imply a comparison between a couple different things with something substantive in common. That’s all a metaphor is really. A sense of irony develops in this comparison between a couple of critters that were common to the time and place.Where the camel was the largest animal regularly spotted in Yisrael, in regions where the Babylonian Talmud developed the elephant seems too have been. So we find an elephant passing thru the eye of the needle in Talmudic aphorisms.What's more recognizable becomes more relevant. Regardless, here the gnat appears as the most common smallest critter and a camel, the largest. We see a comparison made between them highlighting the magnitude of their size. The ridiculous, irony establishing the hyperbole isn’t likely to succeed without it.The context of the story doesn’t indicate the gnats or camels are atypical, so we apply our reality and compare. This particular hyperbole/metaphor seems to present more irony to me than humor. Granted, I’d reckon just about everybody within earshot who took them Pharisees for a bunch of tools probably gotta good kick out of it, but any humor may have been lost on those reserving judgment.I doubt the same could be said of the irony established in the ridiculous comparison.Unless those listening were somehow unable to conjure up the images of two of the most common critter’s in their daily life to make a worthwhile comparison. Then perhaps they missed it, and simply followed with some nervous laughter ..One Love

quote:

---

PurpleDawn writes:

​

I would like to look at various passages considered by some to be contradictions or absolute statements and see if hyperbole comes into play.

Your argument is: the bible contains hyperbole and the bible shouldn't contain contradictions therefore any contradictions are probably hyperbole.

---

Sorry, that is not my argument.

quote:

---

The fact that people use similar exaggerations does not mean that these verses are exaggerations.

---

The fact that you said that doesn't mean they aren't either.Both verses use a universal negative. Basically, never before and never again. Absolutes tend to be exaggerations. (No, I didn't say that all absolutes are exaggerations.) IMO, the audience would understand it as a compliment.So what is your support that they should be read literally and be considered contradictions?
Really if you do understand them literally, they still aren't contradictions because each individual is unique. Each king is going to have his own style and foibles.

quote:

---

If you do not have anything solid to support your claim that those particular verses aren't simply contradictions then there is nothing to discuss.
All you are doing is stating a subjective opinion.

---

That was just the opening post. What did you expect, a dissertaion?How is hyperbole determined in any other book we read?

That's a very simplistic analysis in my opinion. Clearly Jesus was using a literary device, but he was not condemning anyone for swallowing anything. In my opinion the above is clearly a metaphor rather than hyperbole. The metaphor would have worked just as well if Jesus had spoken of a large throat sized chunk of something distasteful. Using a camel made the point impossible to miss.I am also not prepared to say that the scale of missing things (found gnat but missed camel) is an exaggeration of the scale of mistake the Pharisees were making. I find the comparison apt. I disgree that Jesus did not intend to invoke irony by comparing a gnat to a camel. I think the comparison was very much intended.But in either event I don't see much point in arguing about whether the words were metaphor or hyperbole. Nobody thinks the Pharisees were eating camels, so nobody is misreading the Bible by thinking that people were eating camels.

Then you have provided no argument at all. Good. We agree. The fact that people use similar exaggerations offers no support for you claims. You are guessing which absolutes are exaggerations.
You are guessing what the audience would understand as a compliment.
Your opinions are not supporting evidence to your claim. If the verses are not contradictory, then why are you trying to identify them as hyperbole? That is why you listed them!
And again, you try to shift the burden of proof.
If you are claiming that they are hyperbole, then you need to support that claim and not commit the fallacy of Appealing To Ignorance (useful link). No - I expected you to support your claims with more than just wishful thinking.
And since that first post you have made many other posts and they also contain no support for your assertions. I have asked that question several times and all you have managed is "We have to look at what is written." - which is as much use as the IDists claim that they will recognise design when they see it.So far, your claim of being able to show that certain verses in the bible are hyperbole has proven to be untrue.
All you have been able to do is say: "I think this verse is hyperbole. Prove it isn't."Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

The fact that you haven't told me how one detects hyperbole in other books we read, tells me you probably don't know.Just from the responses so far, even in nonreligious writings we have a difference of opinion on what is understood as hyperbole. That 's what it boils down to, opinion.Declaring that my arguments are just my opinion, doesn't negate my argument. Your argument, if you get around to providing one, is also your opinion. We are looking at works that are over 2000 years old. No author or audience to consult. So please stop acting like there is some absolute correct answer out there.I have provded examples of hyperbole and various definitions. That is my support for why I feel the verse is hyperbole. There is no certificate of absolute hyperbole to flash before you.Since this is a debate forum, the opposite position is that the sentence is not hyperbole. If, and only if, you are taking the opposite position and feel that the sentence is not a hyperbole, then yes you do need to provide support for that reasoning.If you don't plan to support a position and just want to critisize, then we have nothing to debate.All we can do is provide support for our reasoning concerning the opinion we present.

In a metaphor the objects are being compared without the use of like or as. The gnat and camel are not being compared in that manner. Example: Love is a rose.The exaggeration isn't relative to what the Pharisees are doing. The exaggeration is the swallowing of the camel. We can't swallow a camel. It is an extreme visual.I didn't bring this verse into the dicussion; but it is a good example of hyperbole in the Bible. If some have difficulty seeing the hyperbole in a verse that isn't disputed how much harder will it be for them to see potential hyperbole in disputed passages?Metaphors can also contain hyperbole. Example: My work place is a Nazi death camp.
The Nazi death camp provides an extreme image and is hyperbole. So my example is a metaphor with hyperbole.The gnat and camel verse is not a metaphor.

quote:

---

The gnat and camel verse is not a metaphor.

---

Are you really suggesting that the Pharisees were literally swallowing animals ?

Purpledawn, you seem to be trying hard to miss my point. Hopefully the following details my reasoning well enough that we can move on. I know fully well what metaphor and a simile are, but thanks for providing the gnat.Matthew 23:24 invokes two comparisons.First, the gnat is being compared to the minute details that the Pharisees apply, while the camel is being compared to the truths that the Pharisees miss.Jesus said that behaving as do the Pharisees is the same as making the gnat/camel mistake. The reader can understand the depth of the Pharisees hypocrisy by making the gnat camel comparison. Surely this analysis is not controversial.The metaphor is Gnat/Camel compared to Tiny Details/Justice-Law-faithfulness. The comparison is of course made without the use of like or as.Using a mathematical exampleTake the statement 1 is to 6 as 3 is to 18. The statement invokes a comparison between the ratio 1/6 and the ratio 3/18. But the ratio 1/6 is also a comparison of 1 to 6. The text in Matthew 23:23-29 invites us to make similar sets of comparisons. Looks like a (tasteless) metaphor to me, unless we are reading the trial transcript of John Demjanjuk. I might make a different call if I read more of the work. But again, we're emphasizing the gnats (nits) while not discussing the camels (the real point). Being able to distinguish between metaphor and hyperbole is not all that important. We both see that the statement re: your job is not to be taken literally.Few people would read the above an expect a description of a job site with disease, starvation, and execution. Similarly, calling hyperbole metaphor won't cause me to misinterpret the Bible (although, strangely enough, your explanation makes me puzzled about how you read in Mathew 23:24). I'd like to explore examples where people make mistakes reading the Bible by not seeing any devices at all.

The burden of proof is on your side. You are making the claims.
Your comment should be directed at yourself: The fact that you haven't told me how one detects hyperbole in the bible, tells me you probably don't know - which is a problem as you claim that you can. Fine.
But opinion is neither argument nor evidence. I am not saying that your arguments are opinions.
I am saying that your opinions are not arguments: they are just assertions.
If all you have is opinion then you have no argument. You have provided no support for your claim. You have only bare assertions.
And, as you should know by now, "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence". My position is that you do not have any reliable way to differentiate between hyperbole and fact.
All you have is "It looks like hyperbole to me!" which is little more than wishful thinking. Your subjective belief regarding the nature of the verses is just that. Ok - so there is no correct answer.
Well, that makes your whole thread pointless.
Is a verse hyperbole? No-one knows./thread

I assumed you understood I'm talking about the sentence, not the paragraph.

I am not sure I can be much clearer. There is no formula. I cannot give you a list of rules or checks that I can use to recognize figurative language.But when I see it, I will know I have seen it. No methods are 100% reliable. But when it comes to recognizing figurative language, "I'll know it when I see it" is the only method we have.Jon