Distinguishing biblical metaphor from reality

J C · 16-09-2010 10:42PM

FionnMatthew wrote: »

What would it take to convince you it was wrong? The smoking gun?

... as far as I see all of the evidence and logic stacks up in favour of the Genesis account!!!

token56 · 16-09-2010 10:46PM

Zillah wrote: »

I'm going to make a movie about J C. It will be 14 hours long.

That would only just be enough to explain his extravagant use of smiles and preference of different coloured text.

Zillah · 16-09-2010 10:46PM

Every time you think that the plot has been resolved and the movie will end, an entire new storyline begins.

J C · 16-09-2010 10:47PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

you have sinned. do you believe you've been consigned to hell?

... I have indeed sinned and I am not worthy of Gods infinite mercy ... yet I have asked for it ... and received it ... and I am Saved, alleluia!!!

... and so I will not be consigned to Hell ... where I deserve to be ... thanks be to God.

rugbyman · 16-09-2010 10:48PM

hope youdont think i am devaluing this thread , but at this moment i am discussing the "lake of fire" with a friend.
he has asked me to quote hime any references to the lake in the bible. can anyne help?
for some reason he has asked me if any references are in the old or the new testament

regrds, rugbyman

J C · 16-09-2010 10:52PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

and secondly, does this mean you can get away with anything as long as you ask for forgiveness?

... you will not go to Hell, if that is what you mean ... once you ask for forgiveness, genuinely ... Jesus came to Save sinners ... not to condemn them.

Something to also be borne in mind is that all sin is a grevious offense in God's eyes.

Equally, even when God forgives your sin ... you will still suffer the temporal consequences of sin ... such as the justice of man and nature.

J C · 16-09-2010 10:56PM

rugbyman wrote: »

hope youdont think i am devaluing this thread , but at this moment i am discussing the "lake of fire" with a friend.
he has asked me to quote hime any references to the lake in the bible. can anyne help?
for some reason he has asked me if any references are in the old or the new testament

regrds, rugbyman

Rev 20:14-15

... and if you want references to Hell ... start with the folowing link and click the 'more results from the NIV' at the bottom of the list:-
http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=hell&qs_version=NIV

Zillah · 16-09-2010 10:56PM

rugbyman wrote: »

hope youdont think i am devaluing this thread , but at this moment i am discussing the "lake of fire" with a friend.
he has asked me to quote hime any references to the lake in the bible. can anyne help?
for some reason he has asked me if any references are in the old or the new testament

regrds, rugbyman

At least twice in Revelations, which is New Testament. Both the Devil and people whose names are not in the book of life will be thrown into it. Load o' bollix really

Ush1 · 16-09-2010 10:58PM

PDN wrote: »

Absolutely. Everything we know of literature of the time tells us that these events were intended to be taken literally. They are totally different from parables etc.

No, I don't see that modern science has addressed these claims at all.

That's painfully obvious.

I'm sorry to break this to you that a man turning water into wine breaks quite a few of the laws of science. Likewise with him walking on water. If you can't see it contradicts what science says, you don't understand science.

J C · 16-09-2010 11:05PM

token56 wrote: »

That would only just be enough to explain his extravagant use of smiles and preference of different coloured text.

... I now only see things in black and white ... because a ban is threatened upon me by the Boards if I use 'too many' smileys.

... and don't ask me what 'too many' smileys means ... because I sure as hell don't know!!!

J C · 16-09-2010 11:08PM

Zillah wrote: »

At least twice in Revelations, which is New Testament. Both the Devil and people whose names are not in the book of life will be thrown into it. Load o' bollix really

... if you happen to end up in the lake of fire ... then you would be rightly 'testiculated'!!!

PDN · 16-09-2010 11:09PM

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

How can you scold someone for "not being interested in a reasonable debate"
when you yourself continue spouting nonsense about genesis not conflicting
with science even though I've given you more than enough reasons to
show this to be a joke assertion.

When the bible states that the earth was created before the sun,
and that plants were created on this earth before the sun,
this conflicts with the nebular hypothesis of the solar system.

Regardless of whether this is "metaphor" or not, the statement itself is
very specific & conflicts with scientific findings. You can't claim this to
be in accord with science when it says something unsupported by scientific
findings. At the end of the day that is all I'm saying & I'd like you to stop
nudging the bible up to the warmth of science's bosom by claiming there is
no contradiction when the bibles words are shown to be incorrect.

The Russian bear argument of yours is talking about the concept of
metaphor, something I understand btw, and it simply does not apply to
this situation whatsoever, you're confusing ideas to suit your agenda.
The only similarity between what the bible says and what science says is
that the earth & the sun were created, beyond that the details differ
dramatically.

I tell you what. Why don't you take the time to get some idea what you're talking about, and then we might have some possibility of a reasonable discussion. I'm genuinely not trying to be rude here, but it's a bit pointless discussing Hebrew literary forms with someone who obviously doesn't understand them. I would be just the same if I were foolhardy enough to pick an argument over something I had never studied.

The Hebrew masha was a parable, or extended metaphor. It was designed to teach one overarching truth, and did so in story form. Therefore it would be a bit daft to get all hung up over the details of the story.

[URL="/http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=63&letter=P"]http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=63&letter=P[/URL]

If you read Ezekiel Chapters 16 and 17 you will see some obvious examples of the masha. They are parables that describe the spiritual history of the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah, yet they do so in story form that treaches a very powerful central truth about their unfaithfulness to the covenant. Any attempt to assign scientific meaning to the details of these parables would be daft. That is not how a masha works.

Most scholars (including many who are not Christians and have no vested interest whatsoever in whether the Bible is true or not) who are most familiar with Hebrew (not me - my Hebrew is very rusty) agree that the beginning of Genesis bears many of the literary characteristics of the masha.

Therefore, if you're really interested in understanding what we're talking about, it is clear that there are good grounds for interpreting Genesis 1 metaphorically. This is nothing to do with a 'salvage operation', but rather applying the best insights we have from a literary and linguistic standpoint. As they like to say on CSI - we 'follow the evidence' - and it matters not whether the results of applying scholarship are socially acceptable (an interpretation of creation that leaves room for evolution) or not socially acceptable (maintaining that the resurrection is portrayed as a literal physical miracle). But please don't come out with the kind of obscurantist crap that our application of literary and linguistic research is cherry picking.

So, if the early part of Genesis is a masha (as seems likely) then you are asking the wrong question by trying to assess whether the details are scientific or not. That would be like me asking a physicist if the higgs boson is moral or immoral. The masha is an extended parable that gets uses a culturally relevant method to teach one central truth - that the universe was created by one all-powerful God. This was in stark contrast to the surrounding cultures who believed in many deities with limited territories and abilities.

Therefore, accepting the opinions of the best Hebrew scholars, one can interpret Genesis 1 as a masha, and there is no conflict with any scientific evidence.

Now, I was reluctant to go into this in detail because most people in this forum aren't interested in Hebrew literature - and then you get those who just want to believe that it's all bollocks anyway. So I've probably just wasted 10 minutes typing this.

Zillah · 16-09-2010 11:10PM

J C wrote: »

... if you happen to end up in the lake of fire ... then you would be rightly 'testiculated'!!!

Uh huh...

Zillah · 16-09-2010 11:13PM

PDN wrote: »

I tell you what. Why don't you take the time to get some idea what you're talking about, and then we might have some possibility of a reasonable discussion. I'm genuinely not trying to be rude here, but it's a bit pointless discussing Hebrew literary forms with someone who obviously doesn't understand them. I would be just the same if I were foolhardy enough to pick an argument over something I had never studied.

The Hebrew masha was a parable, or extended metaphor. It was designed to teach one overarching truth, and did so in story form. Therefore it would be a bit daft to get all hung up over the details of the story.

[URL="/http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=63&letter=P"]http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=63&letter=P[/URL]

If you read Ezekiel Chapters 16 and 17 you will see some obvious examples of the masha. They are parables that describe the spiritual history of the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah, yet they do so in story form that treaches a very powerful central truth about their unfaithfulness to the covenant. Any attempt to assign scientific meaning to the details of these parables would be daft. That is not how a masha works.

Most scholars (including many who are not Christians and have no vested interest whatsoever in whether the Bible is true or not) who are most familiar with Hebrew (not me - my Hebrew is very rusty) agree that the beginning of Genesis bears many of the literary characteristics of the masha.

Therefore, if you're really interested in understanding what we're talking about, it is clear that there are good grounds for interpreting Genesis 1 metaphorically. This is nothing to do with a 'salvage operation', but rather applying the best insights we have from a literary and linguistic standpoint. As they like to say on CSI - we 'follow the evidence' - and it matters not whether the results of applying scholarship are socially acceptable (an interpretation of creation that leaves room for evolution) or not socially acceptable (maintaining that the resurrection is portrayed as a literal physical miracle). But please don't come out with the kind of obscurantist crap that our application of literary and linguistic research is cherry picking.

So, if the early part of Genesis is a masha (as seems likely) then you are asking the wrong question by trying to assess whether the details are scientific or not. That would be like me asking a physicist if the higgs boson is moral or immoral. The masha is an extended parable that gets uses a culturally relevant method to teach one central truth - that the universe was created by one all-powerful God. This was in stark contrast to the surrounding cultures who believed in many deities with limited territories and abilities.

Therefore, accepting the opinions of the best Hebrew scholars, one can interpret Genesis 1 as a masha, and there is no conflict with any scientific evidence.

Now, I was reluctant to go into this in detail because most people in this forum aren't interested in Hebrew literature - and then you get those who just want to believe that it's all bollocks anyway. So I've probably just wasted 10 minutes typing this.

So what's the lesson that the Genesis masha teaches?

J C · 16-09-2010 11:14PM

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

You don't understand, you're claiming god can't impose belief on us because
we have free will but if we choose to disobey him then he can impose
pain on us. This is just a blatant double standard you've concocted along
with the wider authoritarian fantasy.

god can impose pain, but he can't impose belief, what kind of a god is
this? Queue "all-loving and merciful" :rolleyes:

God imposes justice ... but He doesn't impose belief ... all judges do likewise ... and what is wrong with that?

PDN · 16-09-2010 11:18PM

Zillah wrote: »

So what's the lesson that the Genesis masha teaches?

Er, read the post?

PDN wrote:

The masha is an extended parable that gets uses a culturally relevant method to teach one central truth - that the universe was created by one all-powerful God. This was in stark contrast to the surrounding cultures who believed in many deities with limited territories and abilities.

Zillah · 16-09-2010 11:20PM

Now that's curious, I must have skipped over more of your post than I thought. Well I just woke up and will be going back to bed shortly

J C · 16-09-2010 11:27PM

PDN wrote: »

Er, read the post?

Originally Posted by PDN
The masha is an extended parable that gets uses a culturally relevant method to teach one central truth - that the universe was created by one all-powerful God. This was in stark contrast to the surrounding cultures who believed in many deities with limited territories and abilities.

if that was all God wanted to say ... He could have said it in the first verse of genesis ... indeed He did say exactly this in Gen1:1 !!!!

So why did He then give a detailed account of His creative actions on an apparent daily basis for six days ?

... sounds like 'overkill' to me if all He wanted to say was 'In the beginning (one all-powerful) God created the Heavens and the Earth'.

Newaglish · 16-09-2010 11:33PM

atfirstlovenowdisappoint.jpg?t=1284676316

The Mad Hatter · 16-09-2010 11:33PM

Zillah wrote: »

Every time you think that the plot has been resolved and the movie will end, an entire new storyline begins.

How often do you cycle through the same four or five plots?

Galvasean · 16-09-2010 11:40PM

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

How often do you cycle through the same four or five plots?

The DVD is on a loop.

rugbyman · 16-09-2010 11:49PM

J C wrote: »

... if you happen to end up in the lake of fire ... then you would be rightly 'testiculated'!!!

like "Johnny" Cash

Rugbyman

sponsoredwalk · 16-09-2010 11:50PM

Ezekiel 16 is monstrous, absolute filth :mad:
Talk about maniacal maliciousness... :mad:
There is nothing moral whatsoever in that story, I can see how people
would think they are justified in killing prostitutes reading that, and it's
very similar to the Islamic mandates for stoning adulteresses. Is that
the morality you speak of?

This is just another example of the terror of religion, receiving authoritarian
mandate to terrorize prostitutes. I mean Yahwew is punishing her in this
story! If a man feels neglected by his wife who is cheating on him he has
every right to make her suffer, he takes on Yahwew's role as he learned
was apt as a child. Sick stuff in that book, sick stuff...

Still, a parable, or masha, about god picking on a prostitute says nothing
about the first chapter of genesis. I've alread explained to you, and still
see no contradiction after reading your post, that the only similarity
between what the bible says and what science says is that the earth &
the sun were created, beyond that the details differ dramatically.

Why are you still explaining the concept of a parable to me when I
understand. I understand this is a f'ing parable - obviously!!!!

If I say that the colour blue is made of some colour-aether in a poem
that's fine, especially if I'm talking about the various aether's I see in
life & that's the theme of my poem. You have to understand this
basic fact, what I'm saying is not science. My poem is not okay with
science because we've figured out the quantum properties of the
electromagnetic spectrum & know how light occurs.

The thing is, it doesn't matter to me if my poem is in accord with
science because that's not the goal of my poem - just as the religious
parable is not supposed to be in accord with science. I get that, for the
3rd or 4th time I get that. However, and I'll repeat, all I've said to you is
to hold off on telling us your parables are in accord with science because
they clearly are not. The story was written before we knew this stuff
about the solar system, you agree? Biblical literalists use this parable of
yours to explain the origin of life & it's clearly wrong. They are making a
claim about reality that doesn't stand up to the evidence.

Do you see why I'm calling you out on this trivial, uninteresting point?
Just don't tell us it's alright with science, it isn't, just as my poem about
aether isn't nor is my raping of Yeat's Innisfree. That's all I'm trying to
say you don't need to throw manaical biblical verses at me while repeating
what a child knows about allegory & storytelling, okay?

J C · 16-09-2010 11:52PM

Newaglish wrote: »

... such is life!!!!:)

sponsoredwalk · 16-09-2010 11:58PM

Science is about explaining the natural world, your poem is a story about
how the natural world came into being. You've claimed your poem is not
supposed to be in accord with how the natural world formed so don't tell us
that this story is okay with a method of explaining the natural world when it
offers up a detailed yet incorrect parable that aims to explain the natural
world. That is all.

vibe666 · 17-09-2010 12:03AM

J C wrote: »

... you will not go to Hell, if that is what you mean ... once you ask for forgiveness, genuinely ... Jesus came to Save sinners ... not to condemn them.

Something to also be borne in mind is that all sin is a grevious offense in God's eyes.

Equally, even when God forgives your sin ... you will still suffer the temporal consequences of sin ... such as the justice of man and nature.

okay, so all sin is a grevious offence in gods eyes? hmmm, i wonder where we got all this sin from? oh yeah, according to your book that would be the sin that was forced upon all mankind for eternity BY GOD in the first place.

where's the free will in that exactly?

how about the free will to not have sin forced on us in the first place? we (apparently) don't have any choice but to be sinners because that's how he made us and now we have to beg his forgiveness for the sin he gave us or he sends us off to burn in hell?

this free will stuff is freaking awesome, i love it. :rolleyes:

how's this for an alternative idea? i'll just live my life as normal and if it turns out that god is real and he appears to me when i die, i'll just ask for forgiveness then. i'm pretty sure i'll mean it too if there's the threat of eternal hellfire and damnation as the alternative so i should be all set and won't have wasted my life sitting in boring churches or praying or any of that other crap.

in the meantime though, i'm just going to stick with trying to live a good life just because it's the right thing to do, not because of the threat of eternal damnation if i don't.

Galvasean · 17-09-2010 12:11AM

If God truly is all loving he's hardly gonna send someone to helll for all eternity just because they werent convinced of his existence, despite them living a very good life.

(so... how about that Origin of Specious Nonsense book huh?)

PDN · 17-09-2010 12:12AM

Galvasean wrote: »

If God truly is all loving he's hardly gonna send someone to helll for all eternity just because they werent convinced of his existence, despite them living a very good life.

It's nice to see you agreeing with at least one point of Christian doctrine..

Newaglish · 17-09-2010 12:17AM

PDN wrote: »

It's nice to see you agreeing with at least one point of Christian doctrine..

If that's the case, then why bother praying, going to church etc.?

Galvasean · 17-09-2010 12:17AM

PDN wrote: »

It's nice to see you agreeing with at least one point of Christian doctrine..

Hey, if a God exists I hope it's like the one I just described.

Distinguishing biblical metaphor from reality

Comments