quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your key point seems to be that rich, poetic imagery should be interpreted as prophesy, while direct factual statement should be interpreted as literal truth. Then you claim that direct factual statement - the new-born story - can also be prophetic, while even the poetic imagery is 'probably real'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WS: The poetry of the Bible is both rich with reality (literal meaning for the "present" audience spoken to, and sometimes prophetic in that many of the prophecies in the Bible are after the "law of double reference". That principle is often used throughout the Bible, whether poetically or not. Casual reading of the Scriptures doesn't lend towards proper understanding of all the literary implications embedded in those words. There is an understanding process that matures as underlying principles are learned within any discipline. One doesn't master quantum mechanics with a high school physics 101 course under the belt.
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where is the consistency in this position? Anything now can be real or a vision, or both. Why can't I interpret the Genesis story as a prophesy of a world flood to come when we have polluted our planet and started global warming?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WS: Visions in the Bible are literal visions of things past, sometimes things present, and of course things to come. If one announces a vision, the message of the vision becomes prophecy. A false vision generates a false prophecy.
The world flood was announced by God to Noah at least a thousand years after the creation. Until then there was no need of such a prophecy while God allowed man to develop under the Adamic Covenant. It would be poor interpretation of the Genesis account being but a prophecy of a yet future flood due to the fact many dozens of Bible references to the PAST flood are present, verified by Jesus Christ.
On a side note, it has not been supported that global warming has been caused by pollution by man. It's evident that is part of a long term cycle, demonstrated by the ending of the Ice Age long before pollution was a factor. While local pollution cetainly exxagerates the natural local effects of global warming, the cumulative pollution by man from a millennia of activity can't equal the pollution of one volcanic eruption.
The next treatment prescribed by God is renovation of earth by fire.
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the prophesy is not up to much either. Someone or something is going to love someone or something. Why must it be Christ and the Church? Which Church? I presume each sect believes it refers to them - they cannot all be right. Does this make the prophesy wrong? It certainly makes it useless. Why can't it refer to man's love for the truth, or a child's love for sweets? How can this be an accurate and inerrant word of god? It could mean anything.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WS: There is only one Church, one body of Christ. All sects of Christianity that adhere to just a few commonly held essential biblical beliefs are members of that world-wide body of believers, regardless their pecularities of worship styles. Each member body basically enters by its individual members meeting the conditions of being "born again", accepting the "believe, repent, be baptized" command. All the other elements are part of developing a new lifestyle centered around spiritual instruction, pleasing God.
That book could of course be taken for the meanings you describe, but those meanings wouldn't be consistent with the purposes of King Solomon or God, who asked for and obtained the wisdom no other human had possessed or would possess. He knew God. God spoke through him, not to glorify carnal fleshly love, but through a deep understanding of that relationship between a man and woman reveal the relationship between God and his people. It is a very intimate, personal relationship in the spirit, no less than that possible between humans. There is a relationship with God that is practically impossible to directly describe and capture all the nuances of it. Poetry is one way to better express inward thinking, and so is a love story.
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An often-used argument by creationists is that when they read Genesis it immediately strikes them as obviously true - the obvious first interpretation is that creation took place in a week and there was a flood. Why can we not apply the same argument to the Song? Do you really immediately see it as a depiction of Christ's love for the church? Why, then, is there all this sensual and erotic language, not the kind of thing I usually associate with love of an institution? Why can't it be a collection of love songs, and nothing else?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WS: I doubt many Christians initially read Genesis. Most come to the faith through the Book of John or other New Testament readings. There the reader finds Christ endorsed the Genesis account, dispelling the presumptions of many (even some Christians) that the Old Testament is not useful to them. One can then read the account with confidence there is a literal truth to be realized, as well as imbedded prophecy.
There is no biblical statement linking the Song to the Genesis account. Song of Solomon stands alone, yet completely harmonious with all the other revelations of the desired relationship between God and man. No reader of it will likely make the connection of Christ's love for His Church, His body, of which He is the head. Rather, men come to such knowledge burdened with inappropriate concepts about sex. God invented sex and erotic behavior, which men pervert. He meant all that to be healthy and normal between A man and A woman, limited to individual couples. A healthy, God-endorsed marriage will be full of sexual intimacy.
™ Version 4.2