Please Understand Me (believe, scriptures, Jesus, Bible)

[hilgi]

I think a lot of the disagreements especially between the fundamentalists and those of us who take into account alternate translations or more metaphorical meanings of the bible is due to how we communicate or process information.

Dr. Keirsey Personality Test - Keirsey Temperament Website has done a great job of showing the four main ways we communicate. It would say that the Fundis are typically a Guardian communicator meaning that if you say “This apple is hot”, they think temperature, not a Paris Hilton type expression.

I would imagine that the same problem happened when people were first writing the bible, some were literalists and some were metaphorical. This would also transfer over to those who translate the bible.

The more we learn how others communicate the better we can understand what a person is saying, not just the words they are using.

[ahigherway]

Originally Posted by hilgi

I think a lot of the disagreements especially between the fundamentalists and those of us who take into account alternate translations or more metaphorical meanings of the bible is due to how we communicate or process information.

Dr. Keirsey Personality Test - Keirsey Temperament Website has done a great job of showing the four main ways we communicate. It would say that the Fundis are typically a Guardian communicator meaning that if you say “This apple is hot”, they think temperature, not a Paris Hilton type expression.

I would imagine that the same problem happened when people were first writing the bible, some were literalists and some were metaphorical. This would also transfer over to those who translate the bible.

The more we learn how others communicate the better we can understand what a person is saying, not just the words they are using.

Hi hilgi,
I think that a major difference between those who read the scriptures "literally" and those who see it as a spiritual text, is that those who read it literally believe that it is as simple as reading the Three Little Pigs, and they therefore run into problems of needing to justify a lot of things that are clearly spiritual.
Literalists don't believe that Jesus is a literal Door, or that they are literal sheep. And that a literal sword comes out of the mouth of a man who lived 2,000 years ago.

Sometimes people know in their heart that what they're reading is not literal, but they are embarrassed or ashamed to look deeper within themselves for a deeper meaning.

Blessings,
brian

[hilgi]

Originally Posted by ahigherway

Hi hilgi,
I think that a major difference between those who read the scriptures "literally" and those who see it as a spiritual text, is that those who read it literally believe that it is as simple as reading the Three Little Pigs, and they therefore run into problems of needing to justify a lot of things that are clearly spiritual.
Literalists don't believe that Jesus is a literal Door, or that they are literal sheep. And that a literal sword comes out of the mouth of a man who lived 2,000 years ago.

Sometimes people know in their heart that what they're reading is not literal, but they are embarrassed or ashamed to look deeper within themselves for a deeper meaning.

Blessings,
brian

Those are good points but I would still say it leads back to our personality types. Guardians are much more apt to defend a historical meaning verses an new interpretation, they are the people who like to preserve history. Guardians are very much into rules and regs and following order. This is why 80% of al teachers are guardians.

Take a look at the keirsey link, it is interesting stuff. I do caution those who are Rationals that you will be most likely to assume that this stuff is BS. But some Rationals love it once they see the "rationality" of it.

[hljc]

The Lord is a great communicator when you hear his talk, using the English language , He can talk to many people at once drawing on their faith to believe in many diffrent ways at once.....

[ans57]

Originally Posted by hilgi

I think a lot of the disagreements especially between the fundamentalists and those of us who take into account alternate translations or more metaphorical meanings of the bible is due to how we communicate or process information.

Dr. Keirsey Personality Test - Keirsey Temperament Website has done a great job of showing the four main ways we communicate. It would say that the Fundis are typically a Guardian communicator meaning that if you say “This apple is hot”, they think temperature, not a Paris Hilton type expression.

I would imagine that the same problem happened when people were first writing the bible, some were literalists and some were metaphorical. This would also transfer over to those who translate the bible.

The more we learn how others communicate the better we can understand what a person is saying, not just the words they are using.

I agree with you here.
The authors of the scriptures were men who were heavily influenced by the cultural mindset of their time. Metaphors and allegories were the measures used to assess one's knowledge or spiritual wisdom if you will. Many stories in the bible suggest instances where a king was crowned by solving a riddle (Joseph and Zerubabbel for example)...and not by hierarchal descent...

Peace!

[hilgi]

Originally Posted by hljc

The Lord is a great communicator when you hear his talk, using the English language , He can talk to many people at once drawing on their faith to believe in many diffrent ways at once.....

Very true, sometimes he was very direct and easy to understand (for the guardians and artisans) other times he spoke in stories and parable (for the rationals and idealists).

[Mr5150]

Originally Posted by hilgi

I would imagine that the same problem happened when people were first writing the bible, some were literalists and some were metaphorical. This would also transfer over to those who translate the bible.

But we have to accept the fact that God guided those writers and translators. Right? Either God is real and working in people's lives or just a concept. Would not God protect the meanings in His Word to us?

What do you think?

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

But we have to accept the fact that God guided those writers and translators. Right? Either God is real and working in people's lives or just a concept. Would not God protect the meanings in His Word to us?

What do you think?

Think has nothing to do with it. Point out ONE THING in all of reality that you can prove God has actually protected from human flaws and corruptions . . . ONE THING . . . that would justify your expectation that He did so for the Bible. Do you know what Dominion means? We have it by God's WILL!! Get real.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

But we have to accept the fact that God guided those writers and translators. Right? Either God is real and working in people's lives or just a concept. Would not God protect the meanings in His Word to us?

What do you think?

I think that's a very naive way to look at it.

[CantWait2Leave]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

I think that's a very naive way to look at it.

I couldn't disagree more, but I understand why you feel that way.