Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19611 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture ......................... Dear EdB, Thanks for your response, but would you mind clarifying some of your ideas a little more. You said, "The Bible must be taken literally unless the text itself shows it is speaking figuratively by using metaphors, allegories and other such figures of speech." What is a consistent objective way to tell that? For instance you might suggest that anytime someone says, "such and such is LIKE", that it is metaphorical. Or you might know of a book of common figures of speech in ancient Hebrew or Greek. You also say, "Or unless a literal interpretation would violate common sense". I would submit that there are many Bible passages that violate common sense, yet I believe to be literal. Some examples are: the Creation story of making a person out of dirt, or Baalam's donkey talking, or Jesus being born of a virgin, or Jesus comming back to life after being dead for part of 3 days. As you can see, there needs to be a better method of determining the literal from the figurative. I appreciate your help in finding one. |
||||||
2 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 19666 | ||
Sir Pent How is this? The bible must be taken literally unless context or conflicts with other text shows it has to be a Simile, Metaphor, Exaggeration, Personification, and other such figures of speech. And if we don’t realize them to be figures of speech we will take them literally which I think would cause us to error in affirmative more often than not. We must also consider a passage to be literal unless God shows a figurative meaning to the passage. Most parables are designated as such by Scripture. I’m also thinking of the Daniel 7 and the description of the four beast. Here God reveals the fact He was using them figuratively. While in Revelation 9 the locusts must be taken literally. No wonder Calvinist and Arminianist have been fighting for nearly 500 years. I think the real tie breaker must be the Holy Spirit but even that opens a whole new door. Especially when we see two Spirit Filled people come up with two different interpretations. However I think if man ever once said that can’t be and both were forced to reconcile with each other a true meaning would be reached. EdB |
||||||
3 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19828 | ||
Clarification and Support ........................ Dear EdB, Thanks for your further thoughts on this idea, I think you have hit upon a great process. If I understand correctly, you are suggesting that all of scripture should be taken literally, unless it is plainly contradicted by another scripture. In those cases one must be interpreted figuratively. I really like this, because it goes along with two very important beliefs that I hold. The first is that the Bible is completely authoritative, and the second is that it was written and protected by God so that it could be understood by the common man. This process seems to me like it would be very consistent, and could be applied by anyone. One doesn't need a knowledge of ancient culture, so that they can recognize literature types or archaic figures of speech. They only need to read God's Word. Also it seems that everyone would be able to pretty simply decide between just two contradictory passages, which one was literal and which was figurative. Finally, I also like the idea that when in doubt, take it literally. Does anyone else have thoughts on this technique, or can anyone think of any times that this would not work? |
||||||