|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Define literal vs non-literal. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4220 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
I would have to disagree with you on the timing of the writing of the books of the NT. I would also disagree with you on the point of Jesus not being spoken of as an earthly literal person. the gospels are the account of his life and they certainly present a real person. You may have every right to believe this but, for the sake of argument, from what evidence do you derive this? There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2162 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:For another formulation, I would suggest Virkler. His method is consistent with the site you linked to, but I think he organizes the steps in a more logical and clear fashion. Here is the description of his method from wikipedia under Biblical hermeneutics: wikipedia, Biblical hermeneutics writes:
In the interpretation of a text, hermeneutics considers what language says, supposes, doesn't say, and implies. The process consists of several steps for best attaining the Scriptural author's intended meaning(s). One such process is taught by Henry A Virkler, in Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation (1981):
1. Lexical-syntactical analysis: This step looks at the words used and the way the words are used. Different order of the sentence, the punctuation, the tense of the verse are all aspects that are looked at in the lexical syntactical method. Here, lexicons and grammar aids can help in extracting meaning from the text. 2. Historical/cultural analysis: The history and culture surrounding the authors is important to understand to aid in interpretation. For instance, understanding the Jewish sects of the Palestine and the government that ruled Palestine in New Testament times increases understanding of Scripture. And, understanding the connotations of positions such as the High Priest and that of the tax collector helps us know what others thought of the people holding these positions. 3. Contextual analysis: A verse out of context can often be taken to mean something completely different from the intention. This method focuses on the importance of looking at the context of a verse in its chapter, book and even biblical context. 4. Theological analysis: It is often said that a single verse usually doesn't make a theology. This is because Scripture often touches on issues in several books. For instance, gifts of the Spirit are spoken about in Romans, Ephesians and 1 Corinthians. To take a verse from Corinthians without taking into account other passages that deal with the same topic can cause a poor interpretation. 5. Special literary analysis: There are several special literary aspects to look at, but the overarching theme is that each genre of Scripture has a different set of rules that applies to it. Of the genres found in Scripture, there are: narratives, histories, prophecies, apocalyptic writings, poetry, psalms and letters. In these, there are differing levels of allegory, figurative language, metaphors, similes and literal language. For instance, the apocalyptic writings and poetry have more figurative and allegorical language than does the narrative or historical writing. These must be addressed, and the genre recognized to gain a full understanding of the intended meaning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2162 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:The Gospels are narratives relating many details of Jesus' life and ministry. He is born, talks with people, eats with them, walks with them, etc. The Gospels certainly present Him as a literal person! How can you read them and not agree?quote: Note the topic of this thread. As Purpledawn has stressed regarding Genesis 1, we are not considering here whether or not the Gospel accounts are actually true or whether Jesus actually was a literal person, but whether or not the accounts portray Him as a literal person.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Maybe AdminPD will let this line of argument fly now.
Note the topic of this thread. As Purpledawn has stressed regarding Genesis 1, we are not considering here whether or not the Gospel accounts are actually true or whether Jesus actually was a literal person, but whether or not the accounts portray Him as a literal person. The writings of Paul do not portray him as a literal person. He makes no mention of the happenings in the gospels(primarily because they did not exist in his time). He talks about a Jesus that existed in another realm. The writings of Paul are classic representations of the mystery cult, platonic beliefs of that time. He is writing about the other worldly Son of Man. He is not writing as if he believed jesus was a real historical figure. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
The writings of Paul do not portray him as a literal person. He makes no mention of the happenings in the gospels(primarily because they did not exist in his time). I think you have written nonsense here Theodoric. And I would include the speeches Luke records Paul making in the book of Acts. It may be true that the four Gospels had not yet been written while Paul was writing. That does not mean that the events had not occured or that the Jesus Paul wrote about was not a literal person. Paul obviously was writing about the Person of Jesus in connection with historical events which he knew had occured. But his audience to a great degree, and obviously were familiar with the events and the person. If he were deceived about historical facts much of his audience were apparently also aware of those matters.
He talks about a Jesus that existed in another realm. This is a selective over generalization. Yes, some of Paul's writing is about a mystical Christ who is the Spirit - ie. "the last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) That aspect of Christ is crucial to God's new testament economy.That is not a non-literal person to Christians. He said He would manifest Himself to His disciples but the world would not see Him - (See John 14). You selectively generalize that the Christ as the Spirit of Christ is all Paul wrote about Jesus. That is selective bias to intentionally ignore some of Paul's words about Christ. Doesn't First Corinthians 15 discuss the resurrection of Jesus and His appearances to disciples, some of which were still alive to refute or verify what Paul was telling the church in Corinth ? A person in heaven is not a non-literal person. A person who Paul preaches will come again in a second advent is also not a non-literal person. And a person affirms had risen from the dead as witnessed by 500 brethren at one time, (some of which were still alive), is not a non-literal person. And of course to people of faith who experience Christ in His form as the Holy Spirit, Christ today in His availability is not a non-literal person, albeit a supernatural and unusual Person. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Theodoric you wrote the following about Paul:
He makes no mention of the happenings in the gospels The general outline of events is recorded in the Gospels, if not in all of the details.
" ... Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; [ OT Scriptures ] And that He was buried, and that He has been raised on the third day according to the Scriptures; And that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve; Then He appeared to over five hundred brothers at one time, of whom the majority remain until now, but some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles." (1 Cor. 15:3b- 7) The death and resurrection of Jesus was recorded in the four Gospels. The sequence and witnesses may not have been mentioned, ie. James. But the resurrection was. So you cannot say Paul wrote of nothing of Christ as was written about in the Gospels. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
A Masterful teacher has returned in the form of jaywill, welcome back brother, you and your insight were missed. Sorry for the interruption
EAM
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD Edited by AdminPD, : Warning - Use the messaging system for personal comments, not the thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
He is writing about the other worldly Son of Man. He is not writing as if he believed jesus was a real historical figure. Here Paul refers to a saying of Jesus which I don't think we not find in the Gospels. Regardless, it seems a quotation that Paul attributes to Jesus speaking, not in Heaven, but while He had an earthly ministry:
"In all things I [Paul] have shown you by example that toiling in this way we ought to support the weak and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, It is more blessed to give than to receive." (Acts 20:35) Paul spoke here of a teaching of a Jesus while He walked on earth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
quote:The OP really isn't that difficult. There are many occasions when reading through the threads here that I come across this sentence: "Well that's obviously not to be taken literally - it was just a dream/song/interpretation that had at the time" When reading the bible, what are the rules around what is to be taken literally, and what is not? Are there any rules? The method is the issue. Quite frankly, I think everyone needs to stop using the word literal. I stress, that this is not an accuracy and inerrancy thread. No arguing over existence or nonexistence. Keep to the method and reason behind an interpretation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3488 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
Now you woke up jaywill!
quote:What rules of interpretation are you using? Taken at face value, what in the text tells you that Paul did not intend his audience to understand Jesus as a real person who had existed? You didn't provide specific scriptures, so it is hard to know if you are only taking into account those letters considered authentic or all letters attributed to Paul. I agree Paul writes very creatively, but I never had the impression that Paul didn't expect his audience to understand Jesus as a real person who had lived and died. Edited by purpledawn, : Typo Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it. -- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Reply removed.
You were speaking mainly to Theodoric. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2162 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:1) We were discussing Jesus in the Gospels, not in Paul. Since Paul had never met Jesus in the flesh, he understandably writes less about Jesus' earthly life than do the Gospel writers. 2) Claims similar to yours above are often made by modern atheists, but they betray an ignorance of Paul's writings and/or the Gospels. As Jaywill showed, Paul mentions a number of events which ARE recorded in the Gospels. These include Jesus death, burial, and resurrection (and also the Last Supper). 3) The question for this thread is not even whether Paul BELIEVED Jesus was a real historical figure. The question is how Paul PRESENTS Him. As PD asked, what in Paul's writings suggests that he did not intend to portray/present Jesus as a literal, historical, real person? And more specific to the OP, what methodology are you using to determine that Paul did not intend to do so? Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given. Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Paul obviously was writing about the Person of Jesus in connection with historical events which he knew had occured.
Please show this. What historical events?
But his audience to a great degree, and obviously were familiar with the events and the person.
That is a pretty big assumption. Paul no where talks about the happenings of the Gospels. There is a reference to a last supper but ther is no historical info or info that
Doesn't First Corinthians 15 discuss the resurrection of Jesus and His appearances to disciples, some of which were still alive to refute or verify what Paul was telling the church in Corinth ?
Not a physical resurrection on this earth and not a physical appearance to disciples.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
As this line seems to be off topic I will not be responding to posts here.
You might want to look at JESUS: NEITHER GOD NOR MAN It is a well researched book on the case for a mythical Jesus. Since this is not the topic I will not be discussing it further in this thread. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2162 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
quote:Clearly false, as Jaywill and I have shown. quote:Paul's description of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection seems (to me) to be consistent with the descriptions in the Gospels, and to claim a real, historical event. Look, for example, at 1 Cor 15:14-17: NET Bible writes:
What do you see in the TEXT that tells you that Paul is not trying to claim a real, historical resurrection? What interpretive methodology are you applying to the TEXT to determine what Paul is trying to communicate? And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is futile and your faith is empty. Also, we are found to be false witnesses about God, because we have testified against God that he raised Christ from the dead, when in reality he did not raise him, if indeed the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is useless; you are still in your sins. Again, we are NOT asking the question of whether or not Jesus really lived (and we are not interested in unscholarly revisionist historians who claim that He didn't). We are asking about the TEXT itself. What is the interpretive methodology which you are applying to the text to determine authorial intent?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024