Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Not reading God's Word right is just wrong. No talking snakes!
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 157 (511393)
06-09-2009 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by greentwiga
06-09-2009 3:34 PM


So, you're not reading the Bible literally then.
Its cool and all, just don't act like you are.

I prefer the interpretation that god flooded the world with beer, 'cause that would have kicked ass!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by greentwiga, posted 06-09-2009 3:34 PM greentwiga has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by greentwiga, posted 06-09-2009 7:04 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 157 (511610)
06-10-2009 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by greentwiga
06-09-2009 7:04 PM


What the original writer meant and what you assume can be two different things. That is why I want to try to understand what the original writer meant, that is the most literal interpretation.
Um, no. The Peshat is the most literal interpretation. What you are considering is the Derash.
The difference.
When interpreting the Derash, the text cannot lose its Peshat.
The problem I have with your stuff is that intead of reading the Bible and obtaining a meaning, you have obtained a meaning and then are trying to fit the Bible into it.
Its bad theology, imho.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by greentwiga, posted 06-09-2009 7:04 PM greentwiga has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by greentwiga, posted 06-10-2009 11:17 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 157 (511687)
06-11-2009 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by greentwiga
06-10-2009 11:17 PM


Re: Bad Theology?
I have a Masters in Intercultural Communication in addition to two degrees from Fundamentalist Bible Schools.
Yeah? Well I'm Catholic.
I have very carefully scoured the texts, including the Hebrew,
And your unfamiliar with PARDES!? weird...
Much of what I have said is conclusions that I reluctantly arrived at.
...
It is not what I think the Bible says, but what the writer was trying to say.
You honestly think that? Or are you just sayin'?
Because, from your posts here, you seem to have an agenda.
You seem to want to maintain the Bible's literal inerrancy while keeping it in tune with modern science and you are interpreting the text in whatever way you have to in order to acheive this.
I am also a scientist and am well trained in the scientific method. I know what bad science is, and cherry picking facts that fit my preconceived notions is bad science. I don't do that with the Bible either.
But that is exatcly what you are doing in multiple threads here. Do you not see this at all!?
You cherry pick facts from Genesis to support your Garden of Eden theory and ignore all the ones that contradict it. And the ones that you can't ignore you twist into wild interpretation until they fit within your preconceived notion.
I'm baffeled at how you can think that you are doing the exact opposite of what you are actually doing!?
By the way, I haven't heard the terms Peshat and Derash. Can you explain them? Thanks
Did you see this part right here:
The difference.
That its a different color and underlined means that you can click on it and it will link you to another page.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by greentwiga, posted 06-10-2009 11:17 PM greentwiga has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by kbertsche, posted 06-11-2009 12:59 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 157 (511734)
06-11-2009 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by kbertsche
06-11-2009 12:59 PM


Re: Bad Theology?
Your link was the first I had heard of it, too (and I have an MA in theology).
Did you study the Hebrew?
If you look at your link, you will see that "Pardes" is a method used in "rabbinic Judaism." And as far as I can tell, it is pretty much restricted to rabbinic Judaism. This method is not used in Christian biblical exegesis, and I do not believe it is used in broader biblical studies, either.
Oh... okay. You're the one with the theology degree.
PARDES usually only comes up when the Hebrew comes out. What I though was wierd was that greentwiga wrote:
quote:
I have very carefully scoured the texts, including the Hebrew,
emphasis added
I just figured that PARDES would come up at least once if you're carefully scouring the Hebrew.
Maybe you can clear that up for me. Did you too study the Hebrew and have never heard of PARDES?
As greentwiga implied, the assumption is that the original author was trying to communicate something to his contemporaries; our goal is to try to understand what this author meant to communicate.
I get what he's doing. The problem I have is when you take something from today and shoehorn it into the Bible in the sole effort of maintaining inerrancy. I find it dishonest.
That's not what the author really meant. You're just making it out to be that way for another reason.
This is sometimes imprecisely called a "literal" method of interpretation; it is better called a "historical-cultural-grammatical-literary" method of interpretation.
I agree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by kbertsche, posted 06-11-2009 12:59 PM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by kbertsche, posted 06-11-2009 4:06 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 157 (511754)
06-11-2009 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by kbertsche
06-11-2009 4:06 PM


Re: Bad Theology?
quote:
Maybe you can clear that up for me. Did you too study the Hebrew and have never heard of PARDES?
Yes, I studied Hebrew. Two classes of language study followed by a class of Hebrew exegesis. For textbooks we used Ross and instructors' notes. And I never heard of Pardes in any of this.
Hrm. Maybe its not as uncommon as I thought. Thanks for sharing.

FYI:
When you use the url coding, make sure you don't put a space after the = or else it'll but a %20 (the html code for a space) in the address when its clicked on and then the link wont work (which yours didn't).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by kbertsche, posted 06-11-2009 4:06 PM kbertsche has seen this message but 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