Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Should the Bible be taken literlly? | Bible general Archive 1 | hillbilly | 61065 | ||
Should the Bible be taken literlly? | ||||||
2 | Should the Bible be taken literlly? | Bible general Archive 1 | Timothy Paul | 61066 | ||
greetings hillbilly, my Ryrie Study Bible explains interpretation in the following way. Basically, the principal of interpretation is to interpret plainly. The word "literal is avoided because it creates hints, implications, or suggestions that may need to be corrected. Plain interpretation includes the following concepts (among others). To interpret plainly we must understand the meaning of the word taking into consideration the history and the society that was alive back then. Figures of speech are included, since they may help communicate more clearly, as long as what it says is plain. This means behind every figure of speech is a plain meaning, and that is what to look for. Always read the words or verses in context, at least the sentense before and after, if not entire paragraphs. Often this sheds light on the meaning. Beware of those who might say this is not necessary, because it is not only safe to do so, but it is sensible. Recognize that there is a process of revelation. Remember that the Bible was not handed down all at once as a complete book but that it was inspired by God through many different writers over thousands of years. As an example, pork was forbidden in the Old Testament, but it is allowed today. The Bible uses what is technically called phenominal language. This describes things as they appear to be, although they are not. Think of the sun rising or setting, neither of which actually happens. also the ends of the earth, which in that day was basically the Roman empire. These are suggestions only, towards basic concepts of interpretation, That is the way God intended His inspired Bible to be understood. To properly understand it, the illumination of the Holy Spirit must also be present. Christians have been promised this illumination, and it is obvious that the Spirit Itself is the teacher.(John 16:12-15;1Cor 2:9-3:2) Keep working at it and you will be blessed for your efforts, Peace, Tim |
||||||
3 | Should the Bible be taken literlly? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 61096 | ||
Timothy Paul: Grace and peace to you. None of the following is intended as harsh criticism of you. Instead, I write what I do to help you avoid certain problems in future postings. When quoting a published source in our postings, great care and attention to detail must be taken to avoid charges of copyright violation or plagiarism -- neither of which I accuse you of. I merely point these things out to you. First, "You must usually document the title, author, publisher name, and copyright year" (Lockman Foundation) of the material you are quoting. For example, it would have been better in your post had you placed the following information at the bottom of the page, enclosed in parentheses: (UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLE: Interpretation, The Ryrie Study Bible, Charles Caldwell Ryrie, Moody, 1976, 1978) Second, If using direct quotes, by all means enclose them in quotation marks. Third, avoid editing the quoted material. The safest course is to quote it verbatim. For example, you attribute the content of your posting to the Ryrie Study Bible. Then you write: "These are suggestions only, towards basic concepts of interpretation..." The actual quote in Ryrie's own words is: "These suggestions are simply facets of the basic concept of plain interpretation." To paraphrase Ryrie's sentence as you did is to alter the meaning the author intended. Ryrie neither said nor meant that what he wrote were "suggestions only." What he said was: "These suggestions are simply facets of the basic concept of plain interpretation." "These suggestions are simply facets" has a meaning very different from "These are suggestions only." Again, Timothy Paul, please do not take this post as a rebuke. That is the furthest thing from my mind. I appreciate you and the post you submitted. You make excellent points there. My only motive is to spare you any problems that might arise from not giving proper attribution. ************* From the Lockman Foundation. "I want to include a quote from another work in my posting. Can I do that? "If you are not the original creator of the content you submit, you must not violate the rights of the copyright holder by submitting your content without the permission of the copyright holder. You must follow the instructions for quoting material as provided by the copyright holder. You must usually document the title, author, publisher name, and copyright year." (Lockman Foundation) Grace and peace be multiplied to you, kalos |
||||||
4 | Should the Bible be taken literlly? | Bible general Archive 1 | Timothy Paul | 61130 | ||
kalos, I earnestly thank you for your benevolent criticism concerning my post to hillbilly. I assure you that it was taken in the vein in which it was intended, being neither derogatory nor hypocritical. Being quite tired after laboring for a 17 hr. day, I was trying to answer the question in the quickest way that my 2 fingers could type it. I realize now this was self-serving, as I sometimes use this forum as a way to unwind and set my mind right before slumber. You obviously spend much time overseeing posts and censuring those that fail to toe the line and I thank you for that. I wish to thank you and all at Lockman Foundation for all of us that enjoy learning the Bible through this forum Peace and Blessings to you and yours, Tim |
||||||