| Theistic Evolution The subforum for theistic evolutionist members. |  | | 
30th November 2008, 05:51 PM
|  | Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!) 51  | | Join Date: 31st March 2006 Location: Wales
Posts: 12,369
Blessings: 27,003,773 My Mood
Reps: 1,984,022,293,840,305,920 (power: 1,984,022,293,840,324) | | Originally Posted by AV1611VET Yes, indeed.
Adam would have written Genesis 1, and since he wasn't there until Day Six, it doesn't take an Einstein to realize that he got his information directly from God, whom he talked with on a regular basis.
When God speaks throughout Scripture of His mighty power, and He choses to use an example, it's almost always an act of creation that He alludes to. Originally Posted by Isaiah 40:12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance? Originally Posted by Job 38:4-7 4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Ok, so God talks about his acts of creation.
No problem there.
But why do you think this means he is being literal?
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
When you come to the Ammonites, do not
harass them or provoke them. Deut 2:19 | 
30th November 2008, 07:38 PM
|  | SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE 57 
| | Join Date: 18th June 2006 Location: United States
Posts: 2,126,165
Blessings: 2,934,947,694 My Mood
Reps: 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (power: 9,223,372,036,856,908) | | Originally Posted by Isaiah 40:12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance? Originally Posted by Job 38:4-7 4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Originally Posted by Assyrian Ok, so God talks about his acts of creation.
No problem there.
But why do you think this means he is being literal?
Indeed I do think He is being literal here.
__________________ GOD SAID IT -- THAT SETTLES IT | 
30th November 2008, 08:05 PM
|  | Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!) 51  | | Join Date: 31st March 2006 Location: Wales
Posts: 12,369
Blessings: 27,003,773 My Mood
Reps: 1,984,022,293,840,305,920 (power: 1,984,022,293,840,324) | | | There you go. That'll be the problem.
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
When you come to the Ammonites, do not
harass them or provoke them. Deut 2:19 | 
30th November 2008, 08:51 PM
|  | SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE 57 
| | Join Date: 18th June 2006 Location: United States
Posts: 2,126,165
Blessings: 2,934,947,694 My Mood
Reps: 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (power: 9,223,372,036,856,908) | | Originally Posted by Assyrian There you go. That'll be the problem.
Have you seen this post?
__________________ GOD SAID IT -- THAT SETTLES IT | 
1st December 2008, 06:04 PM
|  | Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!) 51  | | Join Date: 31st March 2006 Location: Wales
Posts: 12,369
Blessings: 27,003,773 My Mood
Reps: 1,984,022,293,840,305,920 (power: 1,984,022,293,840,324) | | | Your point?
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
When you come to the Ammonites, do not
harass them or provoke them. Deut 2:19 | 
2nd December 2008, 05:55 AM
|  | The Rapture can take a hike 35 
| | Join Date: 30th October 2003 Location: Scotland
Posts: 7,669
Blessings: 133,471 My Mood
Reps: 5,038,481,752,567,930 (power: 5,038,481,752,583) | | Originally Posted by Assyrian Your point?
I think his point is Genesis = Science, Science = Truth. Scientism in action.
__________________ simul justus et peccator | 
2nd December 2008, 07:10 AM
|  | Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!) 51  | | Join Date: 31st March 2006 Location: Wales
Posts: 12,369
Blessings: 27,003,773 My Mood
Reps: 1,984,022,293,840,305,920 (power: 1,984,022,293,840,324) | | | No, I think here his point is that God said it, 'He' with a capital H, therefore it must be literal. God cannot or would not use metaphor. Clearly Jesus must have been nothing like his Father.
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
When you come to the Ammonites, do not
harass them or provoke them. Deut 2:19 | 
2nd December 2008, 08:32 PM
|  | Veteran 59  | | Join Date: 5th April 2007
Posts: 9,297
Blessings: 124,547
Reps: 44,404,246,110,554,912 (power: 44,404,246,110,568) | | Originally Posted by Assyrian No, I think here his point is that God said it, 'He' with a capital H, therefore it must be literal. God cannot or would not use metaphor. Clearly Jesus must have been nothing like his Father.
I start to wonder what would be the limitation of understanding a literal description as a metaphor. Is a metaphor same as a parable? Or does a parable have more restrictions than a metaphor? If so, is there no bound for an understanding being a metaphor?
For example, if I say snow, you may somehow understand it as the sun, if you like to. | 
2nd December 2008, 09:47 PM
|  | Legend
 | | Join Date: 2nd March 2004 Location: Toronto
Posts: 11,850
Blessings: 61,126
Reps: 12,567,898,174,147,644 (power: 12,567,898,174,166) | | Originally Posted by juvenissun I start to wonder what would be the limitation of understanding a literal description as a metaphor. Is a metaphor same as a parable? Or does a parable have more restrictions than a metaphor? If so, is there no bound for an understanding being a metaphor?
Not quite, though both are comparisons. A parable is usually an allegory i.e. a story in which the various elements are symbolic of a spiritual reality e.g. in the parable of the sower, the sower is Christ (or a preacher), the field is the world, the seed is the gospel, the various soils are the variety of responses to the gospel.
A metaphor is usually a short statement that compares A with B by saying "A is B". So Jesus says "I am the vine" Understanding the relationship of vine and branches is a pictorial way of understanding the relationship of Jesus to the believer. So it is similar to the allegory, but it does not have the story element that the parable does. For example, if I say snow, you may somehow understand it as the sun, if you like to.
That would be an improper reading in most cases. A poet might be able to draw some sort of comparison between the snow and sun, but it would take some doing and would likely be rather strained and artificial.
An effective parable or metaphor is one in which the symbolic element is easily related to the reality it depicts. It should not be farfetched and need a lot of explanation to work out the connection.
The notion that allegorical interpretation is a free-for-all of personal subjectivism is untrue. It betrays a lack of knowledge and experience in working with symbols. Symbols have to have a living relationship with what they symbolize in order to communicate what they are intended to communicate. Sometimes a symbol lives and communicates effectively because it is deeply rooted in a culture. Sometimes because it touches on daily common experience. IOW effective symbols have a public life in the community.
When symbols are given personal idiosyncratic meanings, they are no longer a vehicle of communication. They have private meanings, not public meanings. At best they become secret passwords for a small social group like a secret handshake.
__________________ "Either we've got to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy - and then admit that we just don't wanna do it." Steve Colbert | 
3rd December 2008, 03:59 PM
|  | Veteran 59  | | Join Date: 5th April 2007
Posts: 9,297
Blessings: 124,547
Reps: 44,404,246,110,554,912 (power: 44,404,246,110,568) | | Originally Posted by gluadys Not quite, though both are comparisons. A parable is usually an allegory i.e. a story in which the various elements are symbolic of a spiritual reality e.g. in the parable of the sower, the sower is Christ (or a preacher), the field is the world, the seed is the gospel, the various soils are the variety of responses to the gospel.
A metaphor is usually a short statement that compares A with B by saying "A is B". So Jesus says "I am the vine" Understanding the relationship of vine and branches is a pictorial way of understanding the relationship of Jesus to the believer. So it is similar to the allegory, but it does not have the story element that the parable does.
That would be an improper reading in most cases. A poet might be able to draw some sort of comparison between the snow and sun, but it would take some doing and would likely be rather strained and artificial.
An effective parable or metaphor is one in which the symbolic element is easily related to the reality it depicts. It should not be farfetched and need a lot of explanation to work out the connection.
The notion that allegorical interpretation is a free-for-all of personal subjectivism is untrue. It betrays a lack of knowledge and experience in working with symbols. Symbols have to have a living relationship with what they symbolize in order to communicate what they are intended to communicate. Sometimes a symbol lives and communicates effectively because it is deeply rooted in a culture. Sometimes because it touches on daily common experience. IOW effective symbols have a public life in the community.
When symbols are given personal idiosyncratic meanings, they are no longer a vehicle of communication. They have private meanings, not public meanings. At best they become secret passwords for a small social group like a secret handshake.
Incredibly confusing.
If you give me two random words, I am trying to tie them together one way or another. I would have no way to be sure whether the relationship between them is parable, allegory or metaphor. For the worse, the relationship between these two exact words may change depends on how do you link them together. For example, snow and sun:
1. both are bright
2. both are "pure"
3. both come down from sky
4. both are necessities for life (snow means water in polar area)
5. snow melt --> sun down
6. vapor condensed into snow --> space dust condensed into star
7. ...
In order to separate them apart, these three terms must be defined logically. So is for the term "literal". |  | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode | | | |