Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
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 | 19985 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture........................ Dear Tim, Thanks for providing a good example of a passage which does not "plainly" identify itself as being figurative, and yet is generally interpreted that way. My question is, "Couldn't this passage be taken literally as well?" I think it is important to note that the passages says "causes" and not "caused". In other words, it is not a punishment for a one-time action, but a progressive verb indicating that the sinning is consistent and will continue indefinately. If a person was truly unable to control themselves and was consistently using their eye to lust or their hand to hurt, then it would be better for that person (and those around them) to become incapable of those actions. At the same time, I would submit that this could never be the case for a Christian. As Christians we have the Holy Spirit leading us, and one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) is "self-control". Therefore, rather than just cutting off our hands, a Christian should work with God's help to stop allowing any part of us to be used for sin. |
||||||
2 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 19998 | ||
Sir Pent, one of the several things that I see wrong with taking an unvarnished, literal (and out-of-context) view of Jesus' discourse about self-mutilation is this: it can be reduced to absurdity. For example, we can deduce from the sense of the passage that any bodily part that causes us to sin should be cast away. What does this say to the glutton, for example? Should he not have his digestive system removed? What about the adulterer? This is a fine example, it seems to me, of how an adherence to literism drives us away from, and causes us to miss entirely, the real point that Scripture is making. When too much focus is riveted on the ears, the trunk, and the tusks, the elephant is not seen for what it really is. --Hank | ||||||
3 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20002 | ||
Clarification ................................... Dear Hank, It seems here that you are making a "slippery slope" argument. By saying that we should cut off hands, then next we'll say cut off arms, and then heads, etc. The problem is that the verse does not say to do these other things. It's when we interpret verses to be figurative that we most often expand their meanings. On the other hand, I completely agree with you that we need to see the overall point of what Jesus was saying. Whether the passage is literal or figurative, it definately shows the importance of living holy lives and the graveness of sin. |
||||||
4 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 20007 | ||
To expand on a meaning is not necessarily to distort it. There is no "slippery slope" argument involved in what I said. To address a passage as literal when the meaning clearly is not literal is to miss the point entirely. --Hank | ||||||
5 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20060 | ||
Support ......................................... Dear Hank, You write, "To address a passage as literal when the meaning clearly is not literal is to miss the point entirely." I completely agree. And that is exactly why we need a consistent way to tell the difference. |
||||||