Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And once again, you ignore the rules of interpretation: As already given in post # 130...
Excerpt:
Rule 03
The Golden Rule of Interpretation
III.The third rule of interpretation is as follows: When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise.
A.Seek the plain, literal meaning of the Scriptures.
1.The sum and substance of this most important rule is that one should take every statement of the Scriptures at its face value, if possible.
2.The following is an analysis of the adjectives “primary,” “ordinary,” and “usual.”
3.“Primary” emphasizes the original, inherent idea in the term.
4.“Ordinary” and “usual” are practically synonyms, especially in this definition, “usual” being employed for the sake of emphasis.
5.“Literal” is used to emphasize the thought that every word must first be taken literally as expressing the exact thought of the author at the time when it was used; and one is not to go beyond the literal meaning of the Scriptures unless the facts of the context indicate a deeper, hidden or symbolic meaning.
B.Seek the figurative meaning only when the facts demand such an interpretation.
1.Modernism and rationalism are the logical outgrowth of forcing a figurative meaning upon a passage that is clearly literal, or vice versa.
C.Study every statement of the Scriptures in context. A TEXT APART FROM ITS CONTEXT IS A PRETEXT. Then study the facts of the context in the light of related passages and axiomatic fundamental truths. “... No prophecy of scripture is of private (special) interpretation” (II Peter 1:20); “The sum of thy word is truth” (Psalm 119:160).
D.Study the following texts and apply the Golden Rule of Interpretation:
1.Zechariah 9:9,10
2.Jeremiah 29:9-14
3.Ezekiel 34:20-24 (Will David be king over Israel?)
The Golden Rule of Interpretation is one of the most important principles governing us in our interpretation of the Scriptures. If we follow this rule, we shall never go very far wrong; but if we fail to follow it, we shall never go right. Rule 03
Excerpt:
Origen, a great Christian scholar who lived during the latter part of the second and the first part of the third century of the Christian Era, came under the influence of Greek philosophy in the form of Neoplatonism. He adopted some of the so-called principles of this philosophic system and evolved what has become known as the allegorical method of interpreting the Scriptures. According to this theory there is a spiritual meaning of the Bible in addition to that which is plain andobvious. Origen accepted the literalinterpretation of the Word but claimed that in addition to it there was this hidden, spiritual meaning. Everything to him was therefore allegorical. He read into the Scriptures this so-called spiritual meaning and built up a mystical system of theology. This method of interpreting the Word wrought havoc in the early church and started what is known as “spiritualizing the Scriptures.” Its baneful effects have been felt throughout the centuries. The Christian world has never entirely freed itself from the tentacles of this heathen, subjective approach to God's holy, infallible Word. Some Basic Rules of Interpretation
On what basis do you consider yourself qualified to dispute established rules of interpretation and simply declare the whole Bible to be allegorical?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
Your instructions recommend to take most of the Bible literally which is well established. That in itself is the major pitfall of fundamentalists.
That's an empty statement backed up by nothing made by someone who is not even a believer. In post #71 you said the following: 'However, i will never be certain about the existence of God. At most I can only hope there is a God because there are some things about the creation of the universe that remain unexplained.'
So again I ask you, On what basis do you consider yourself qualified to dispute established rules of interpretation and simply declare the whole Bible to be allegorical?
So again I ask you, On what basis do you consider yourself qualified to dispute established rules of interpretation and simply declare the whole Bible to be allegorical?
Anyone can dispute the "established rules of interpretation" since they are part and parcel of the "precepts and doctrines of men" decried by Christ.
That's an empty statement backed up by nothing made by someone who is not even a believer. In post #71 you said the following: 'However, i will never be certain about the existence of God. At most I can only hope there is a God because there are some things about the creation of the universe that remain unexplained.'
So again I ask you, On what basis do you consider yourself qualified to dispute established rules of interpretation and simply declare the whole Bible to be allegorical?
If you had a bit of agnosticism you would see my point. The allegory is quite obvious, but difficult to accept.
You did say it's impossible to fast for 40 days, so it does matter.
That was my point...And I believe that he was staing the immossibility of it to prove that it was merely a metaphor, if that is the case, then the fact proven that it has been scientifically and empirically blows his case out of the water...
That's an empty statement backed up by nothing made by someone who is not even a believer. In post #71 you said the following: 'However, i will never be certain about the existence of God. At most I can only hope there is a God because there are some things about the creation of the universe that remain unexplained.'
So again I ask you, On what basis do you consider yourself qualified to dispute established rules of interpretation and simply declare the whole Bible to be allegorical?
I still want to know if he believes religion to be a metaphor...
I'll read the rest of this tomorrow, but trettep's idea of Satan being a personification of carnal human frailty is interesting when read in light of the story of Jesus being tempted by Satan. An unconventional explanation could be that Jesus was fighting against his human side, e.g. the lust for power, wealth? Of course Christ's divine side knew that was preposterous, since he was the Son/God already owned all of that already. Which is why it never made sense, unless Jesus was somehow blind-sided of his divine identity for that time.
Trimac20, that is exactly what I believe Jesus was doing (resisting the desire of His own selfish flesh). The scriptures are clear that we are tempted when when we give into the lusts of the flesh. Jesus being made of flesh was being tempted to be disobedient to God by satisfying the SELF. Now consider that since He knows who He Himself is that His very own SELF would have a greater force of temptation than the rest of us if you consider what I'm explaining here.
Trimac20, that is exactly what I believe Jesus was doing (resisting the desire of His own selfish flesh). The scriptures are clear that we are tempted when when we give into the lusts of the flesh. Jesus being made of flesh was being tempted to be disobedient to God by satisfying the SELF. Now consider that since He knows who He Himself is that His very own SELF would have a greater force of temptation than the rest of us if you consider what I'm explaining here.
Nice interpretation!
The whole Bible passage is written in that manner to teach a point. The Devil metaphor was very useful.
Originally Posted by Trimac20 I'll read the rest of this tomorrow, but trettep's idea of Satan being a personification of carnal human frailty is interesting when read in light of the story of Jesus being tempted by Satan. An unconventional explanation could be that Jesus was fighting against his human side, e.g. the lust for power, wealth? Of course Christ's divine side knew that was preposterous, since he was the Son/God already owned all of that already. Which is why it never made sense, unless Jesus was somehow blind-sided of his divine identity for that time.
Trimac20, that is exactly what I believe Jesus was doing (resisting the desire of His own selfish flesh). The scriptures are clear that we are tempted when when we give into the lusts of the flesh. Jesus being made of flesh was being tempted to be disobedient to God by satisfying the SELF. Now consider that since He knows who He Himself is that His very own SELF would have a greater force of temptation than the rest of us if you consider what I'm explaining here.
Amen! Satan, the Serpent, is within us all and must be controlled when it would have us do unloving things to others for our selfish reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
The whole Bible passage is written in that manner to teach a point. The Devil metaphor was very useful.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Satan, 
