Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Distinguishing biblical metaphor from reality

  • 16-09-2010 10:25AM
    #1
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Quoting from The God Delusion:

    Yeah, sort of horrible really.

    At least he was honest with the conflict between science and the bible. Not tip toeing around and cherry picking saying which parts literal and which are parable.


«13456789

Comments

  • #2
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Ush1 wrote: »
    Yeah, sort of horrible really.

    At least he was honest with the conflict between science and the bible. Not tip toeing around and cherry picking saying which parts literal and which are parable.

    I'm pretty sure he treated the Parable of the Talents, for example, as a parable and not as literal history. He might disagree with most other Christians as to which parts of the Bible are parable and which are literal (particularly if his qualifications are in geology rather than biblical studies). However, to portray him as therefore being honest (with the implication that those Christians who disagree with him are being dishonest) is marvellously apt given the title of this thread.

    Still, it's nice that you can have a whale of time setting up strawmen by pretending that those with more nuanced views are thereby dishonest. (Sorry for using a metaphor about a whale - I hope it wasn't too tiresome having to tiptoe round and cherry-pick to discern that I wasn't referring to a literal whale).


  • #3
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    Are you suggesting that we think that Christians take parables that are labelled as such in the bible literally? Because if you are, then there is certainly a straw man on the field here, but not where you think.

    It's funny, any time literal biblical truth comes up, you seem to counter it with the example of the parables. Of course the parables aren't meant to be literal - they're parables.


  • #4
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,617 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Dougla2 wrote: »
    what mythical hell dimensions , grow the **** up do you also believe in the easter bunny?
    Yes, it was late last night, but such responses are uncalled for. This thread isn't worth getting into trouble over.


  • #5
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure he treated the Parable of the Talents, for example, as a parable and not as literal history. He might disagree with most other Christians as to which parts of the Bible are parable and which are literal (particularly if his qualifications are in geology rather than biblical studies). However, to portray him as therefore being honest (with the implication that those Christians who disagree with him are being dishonest) is marvellously apt given the title of this thread.

    Still, it's nice that you can have a whale of time setting up strawmen by pretending that those with more nuanced views are thereby dishonest. (Sorry for using a metaphor about a whale - I hope it wasn't too tiresome having to tiptoe round and cherry-pick to discern that I wasn't referring to a literal whale).

    That is some what of an ironic post considering you have consistently tip toed around the issue of whether the wider historical narrative in the early books are to be taken as literal history or not, particular the bits that conflict with actual historical data such as Noah or Moses.

    It is easy to fudge the question of Adam and Eve (eg not the first humans, first humans with souls or some such interpretation) since a lot of Biblical scholars think the creation story is a poem. But the rest of Genesis and Exodus?


  • #6
    sensibleken
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Best larger than what?

    its has Devils bit and lucifer beer. plus rock n roll, casual sex, central heating and best of all...no christians


    ....and banjo. woo!


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    PDN wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure he treated the Parable of the Talents, for example, as a parable and not as literal history. He might disagree with most other Christians as to which parts of the Bible are parable and which are literal (particularly if his qualifications are in geology rather than biblical studies). However, to portray him as therefore being honest (with the implication that those Christians who disagree with him are being dishonest) is marvellously apt given the title of this thread.

    Still, it's nice that you can have a whale of time setting up strawmen by pretending that those with more nuanced views are thereby dishonest. (Sorry for using a metaphor about a whale - I hope it wasn't too tiresome having to tiptoe round and cherry-pick to discern that I wasn't referring to a literal whale).

    Yes it is honest. So what are you saying? It should be totally obvious which parts are parable and which parts aren't?

    Disagree with most other Christians, which sect of Christians do you mean? They seem to disagree on quite alot of things within their faith.

    Nuanced views!:pac: Yeah, there is deep parable in Barney the dinosaur, it's not actually for children. Really, really sophisticated minds actually get it.


  • #8
    FionnMatthew
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 644 ✭✭✭FionnMatthew


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    Im having a major issue with this thread and may soon have to stop perusing it. Any time I read JC's posts now I read them in either a strong North of Ireland accent just like the bible bashing loons one regularly find on street corners threatening passers by with fire and brimstone. But more and more often now i read them in a deep South 'Billy Bob plays the banjer' accent. Help :eek:

    I'm just assuming he's being completely sarcastic.
    [sarcasm]Jesus loves you too.[/sarcasm]


  • #9
    Yara Eager Suburbanite
    Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Yara Eager Suburbanite


    sensibleken wrote: »
    its has Devils bit and lucifer beer. plus rock n roll, casual sex, central heating and best of all...no christians


    ....and banjo. woo!

    What :confused:
    that still doesnt answer best bigger than what


  • #10
    sensibleken
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    bluewolf wrote: »
    What :confused:
    that still doesnt answer best bigger than what

    he meant lager. theres no lager in hell.


  • #11
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Of course the parables aren't meant to be literal - they're parables.
    Believe it or not, there are christians out there who think that the parables are literally true, and that the events described in them actually happened.

    It's certainly not a common position, but it does exist.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    robindch wrote: »
    Believe it or not, there are christians out there who think that the parables are literally true, and that the events described in them actually happened.

    It's certainly not a common position, but it does exist.

    ...

    ...

    *twitch*


  • #13
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that we think that Christians take parables that are labelled as such in the bible literally? Because if you are, then there is certainly a straw man on the field here, but not where you think.

    It's funny, any time literal biblical truth comes up, you seem to counter it with the example of the parables. Of course the parables aren't meant to be literal - they're parables.

    I'm suggesting that some people know fine rightly that Christians don't take the parables literally, but that it suits them to pretend otherwise in order to present creationists as honest and other Christians as dishonest.


  • #14
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    We're not talking about parables.


  • #15
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    We're not talking about parables.

    You might not be, but it's not all about you.

    My post was in response to one by Ush 1 in which he stated:
    Ush1 wrote:
    At least he was honest with the conflict between science and the bible. Not tip toeing around and cherry picking saying which parts literal and which are parable.

    So, as Tonto said to the Lone Ranger, "Who is this we you speak of, paleface?" (They were surrounded by 5000 angry Sioux warriors and the Lone Ranger had just said, "Tonto, I think we're in trouble.")


  • #16
    Lemegeton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 598 ✭✭✭Lemegeton


    J C wrote: »
    He loves everyone and died to Save everyone (including Gays ... and Atheists).

    :D:D:D lol. you guys crack me up when you spout this horse****. you use this concept to scare people into feeling like they OWE jesus something and its a ****ing guilt trip. lets assume just for arguments sake this jesus person existed. How exactly did his death save us. and none of your "the bible/god said it, so its true" nonsense


  • #17
    joseph brand
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,540 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Quoting from The God Delusion:

    from wiki:
    Dawkins continued:
    We have it on the authority of a man who may well be creationism’s most highly qualified and most intelligent scientist that no evidence, no matter how overwhelming, no matter how all-embracing, no matter how devastatingly convincing, can ever make any difference

    Very interesting stuff. No matter what evidence, he will not change. Maybe he enjoys the God idea/ organised religion more than science.


  • #18
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    PDN wrote: »
    You might not be, but it's not all about you.

    My post was in response to one by Ush 1 in which he stated:


    So, as Tonto said to the Lone Ranger, "Who is this we you speak of, paleface?" (They were surrounded by 5000 angry Sioux warriors and the Lone Ranger had just said, "Tonto, I think we're in trouble.")

    I suspect, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, that Ush1 misused the word parable, and was referring not to the parables of Jesus but to the sections of the bible which are clearly meant as historical narrative but contradicted by the historical record, and which thus have come to be thought of as metaphor.


  • #19
    Paparazzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,395 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    I listened to john mays interview on phantom, he says that Francis Collins, head scientist on the project mapping the human genome believes there's a creator. 10th seconds of research online and I found:
    In his 2006 book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Collins considers scientific discoveries an "opportunity to worship." In his book Collins examines and subsequently rejects creationism and intelligent design.


  • #20
    sensibleken
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    Paparazzo wrote: »
    I listened to john mays interview on phantom, he says that Francis Collins, head scientist on the project mapping the human genome believes there's a creator. 10th seconds of research online and I found:
    In his 2006 book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Collins considers scientific discoveries an "opportunity to worship." In his book Collins examines and subsequently rejects creationism and intelligent design.

    If you really listened to the interview youd know that facts prove nothing!


  • #21
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    I suspect, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, that Ush1 misused the word parable, and was referring not to the parables of Jesus but to the sections of the bible which are clearly meant as historical narrative but contradicted by the historical record, and which thus have come to be thought of as metaphor.

    I don't think I did misuse in the word.

    "A parable is a brief, succinct story, in prose or verse, that illustrates a moral or religious lesson. It differs from a fable in that fables use animals, plants, inanimate objects, and forces of nature as characters, while parables generally feature human characters. It is a type of analogy.[1]"

    What I was saying was that I think it is intellectually dishonest or ignorant to try to pass as things that are now socially unacceptable or scientifically inaccurate as metaphors when there seems to be no real set differentiation and they were not originally thought of in this way.

    It is wilful ignorance of the highest order and "nuanced views" is a comical excuse. They are better off saying it's wrong, or just disregarding science and believing the bible altogether. The man in the story in the God Delusion, chose the latter.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Yara Eager Suburbanite
    Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Yara Eager Suburbanite


    sensibleken wrote: »
    he meant lager. theres no lager in hell.

    Yeah, so I made a joke in response "larger than what".
    I didn't really understand your response
    :confused:

    nevermind :D


  • #23
    sensibleken
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    Lemegeton wrote: »
    :D:D:D lol. you guys crack me up when you spout this horse****. you use this concept to scare people into feeling like they OWE jesus something and its a ****ing guilt trip. lets assume just for arguments sake this jesus person existed. How exactly did his death save us. and none of your "the bible/god said it, so its true" nonsense

    Hey! he did die for all of you. remember at the end of the new testament when he ascends into the main lazer in the aliens spaceship and blows it up after they uploaded the virus that brought down their shie.....no wait sorry, thats independance day.


  • #24
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    Ush1 wrote: »
    I don't think I did misuse in the word.

    "A parable is a brief, succinct story, in prose or verse, that illustrates a moral or religious lesson. It differs from a fable in that fables use animals, plants, inanimate objects, and forces of nature as characters, while parables generally feature human characters. It is a type of analogy.[1]"

    What I was saying was that I think it is intellectually dishonest or ignorant to try to pass as things that are now socially unacceptable or scientifically inaccurate as metaphors when there seems to be no real set differentiation and they were not originally thought of in this way.

    It is wilful ignorance of the highest order and "nuanced views" is a comical excuse. They are better off saying it's wrong, or just disregarding science and believing the bible altogether. The man in the story in the God Delusion, chose the latter.

    Yes, but I'm assuming you were not referring to the parables told by Jesus to his disciples to illustrate a point, but to the accounts of Genesis and the like which purport to be history, but which many biblical scholars now claim were not meant literally.


  • #25
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Yes, but I'm assuming you were not referring to the parables told by Jesus to his disciples to illustrate a point, but to the accounts of Genesis and the like which purport to be history, but which many biblical scholars now claim were not meant literally.

    Yes, I'm talking about the bits that aren't parable being called parable.


  • #26
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Ush1 wrote: »
    What I was saying was that I think it is intellectually dishonest or ignorant to try to pass as things that are now socially unacceptable or scientifically inaccurate as metaphors when there seems to be no real set differentiation and they were not originally thought of in this way.

    So, you're not referring to the first chapter of Genesis since people like Augustine taught that it was a metaphor long before there was any social pressure or scientific evidence to do so?

    There is a problem with intellectual honesty and ignorance here, but I don't think it lies with those Christians who are not creationists.


  • #27
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    Ush1 wrote: »
    Yes, I'm talking about the bits that aren't parable being called parable.

    Grand - that's all I was getting at, stemming from this post.


  • #28
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    PDN wrote: »
    So, you're not referring to the first chapter of Genesis since people like Augustine taught that it was a metaphor long before there was any social pressure or scientific evidence to do so?

    There is a problem with intellectual honesty and ignorance here, but I don't think it lies with those Christians who are not creationists.

    Funny how "people like Augustine" always seems to mean "Augustine" too.


  • #29
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Funny how "people like Augustine" always seems to mean "Augustine" too.

    I'm not quite sure what that's supposed to mean. :confused:

    I was thinking of the likes of Johannes Scotus Eriugena - what with him being Irish and all. Do you think he was Augustine too? Like reincarnation and stuff?


  • #30
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    PDN wrote: »
    So, you're not referring to the first chapter of Genesis since people like Augustine taught that it was a metaphor long before there was any social pressure or scientific evidence to do so?

    There is a problem with intellectual honesty and ignorance here, but I don't think it lies with those Christians who are not creationists.

    Genesis wasn't scientifically inaccurate when Augustine was around so he could use it whatever way he liked.

    Try and read what I actually said.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    sensibleken
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    PDN wrote: »
    I'm not quite sure what that's supposed to mean. :confused:

    I was thinking of the likes of Johannes Scotus Eriugena - what with him being Irish and all. Do you think he was Augustine too? Like reincarnation and stuff?

    I know he talked about the eucharist being symbolic, where did he talk of genesis being not literal history.

    Either way, I dont think it matters.

    Everyone can forgive people 1500 years ago believing the biblical account of creation if there was nothing wlse to go on. However if there is a massive amount of evidence contradicting it its a bit silly to still believe it in this day and age


Advertisement