Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19974 | ||
Request For More Input .......................... Dear Tim and fellow Forumites, I agree with you that whether it is a poem or not doesn't tell us for sure whether the Genesis Creation account is figurative or literal. I would appreciate everyone's input on the process that EdB suggested (10/19/01, 1:13am) for consistently determining whether scripture is literal or figurative. I like it, but want to know what the rest of you think. |
||||||
2 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 19992 | ||
There has never been, to my knowledge, a universally accepted, absolute standard promulgated for the art of separating biblical literalism from biblical symbolism. But there are nevertheless some guidelines that have served biblical scholars well for many centuries. The one that comes foremost to mind is that the Bible should be approached, insofar as possible, in an objective manner, with a mind that has been cleansed of pre-conceived notions and bias. We run into all manner of problems when we seek to "prove" the validity of our own deeply ingrained ideas by the Bible. It should of course be that we lay aside our vanity and thus make room for God's truth to finds its way into our hearts and minds....... If, for example, I have bought into the Darwinian lie of evolution, I am quite unlikely to view the first few chapters of Genesis as anything but a fairy tale of pure folklore told by an ancient people who didn't know any better. If I am unwilling to accept no concept but naturalism, it is incumbent upon me to invent ways to explain away any and all accounts of miracles, because miracles involve supernaturalism. If I believe that sin is a man-made idea that has no basis in reality, the idea of the need for a Saviour is at once preposterous...... This objective approach to Scripture, to be sure, is not being offered as a cure-all panacea for all difficult passages, but it is solid ground on which to take the first step...... Context is another. If, for example, Jesus' saying that His disciples should engage in going about the grisly business of gouging out their own eyes is clearly out of step with the body of His other teachings (and it is), then we are wise to read the passage for what it clearly is and was meant to be: a conscious, deliberate exaggeration designed to drive home the truth of His message. But to view the passage in this manner is not wild interpretation. It could hardly be called interpretation at all. It is in reality mere understanding of the plain sense and the point of the passage..... Jesus referred to Himself variously as being bread, door, and vine. Yet no school child would likely have any problem in understanding that Jesus was never a physical piece of bread or a door or a vine...... Not even the most severe of fundamentalists would argue that the parables were anything other than fictional accounts of the commonplace whose purpose is merely to illustrate truth, not to relate a true event...... By and large, the Bible is a factual account of God's dealings with the human race. If we keep this fact as a premise, the variations of poetic justice, allegory, parable and symbolism will, in most cases, present far fewer interpretative challenges. ...... Above all, the most fruitful means at our disposal for rightly dividing the word of truth comes, not from our resolute mind, but from our bended knee. It is only when we go to God in prayer, and petition Him to let the Spirit guide us into all truth, that we have any real assurance of understanding truly what God is saying to us through His word. --Hank | ||||||
3 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20001 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture........................ Dear Hank, I don't know of any universally accepted way of determining biblical literalism and biblical symbolism either. That is the very reason why I am trying to come up with one here on the forum. As for the rest of your ideas about being objective when reading scripture, letting the Holy Spirit guide you, and just looking for the plain sense, I agree in one sense. Those all sound like great ideas, and if we all did them perfectly then there would be no problems. However, they are very subjective, and the simple truth is that we don't do them perfectly, and probably never will. Therefore, in a community there needs to be some kind of established principles that are objective and can be applied consistently. That is all we are trying to accomplish here. To look at the specific example that you cited, I believe it could be dealt with, within our current framework. Jesus said He was bread, a door, and a vine. But another scripture says that Jesus became a human (Phil 2:7). Therefore, based purely on scripture, we are forced to determine which is figurative and which is literal. Then of course it is obvious based on the vast amount of scriptures referring to Jesus that He was definately a human and not a slice of bread. The process seems to work here. |
||||||
4 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 20006 | ||
If, Sir, this forum which has a tarnished history of being unable to agree on virtually any subject that is cast before it, meets your expectation of being able to reach a definitive concensus upon the subject of a "universally accepted way of determining biblical literalism and biblical symbolism," then I am prepared to revisit and reconsider my childhood beliefs in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. --Hank | ||||||