Literal Interpretation or Allegory (The Bible)

[BC1980]

Possibly, but then what's the point in the crusafixtion of Jesus if he isn't dying to save us from original sin?

 

All in all Christianity is an interesting myth to me but there a lot of other much more interesting myths out there in my opinion. The only reason this one gets so much discussion is because a lot of people still believe it in certain parts of the world.

 

I'm saying that OT writers used the literary device of allegory to communicate a religious truth. I'm not saying that the use of allegory and metaphor renders the message untrue. I don't take the OT to be a history or science text. It is quite a rich source of ancient literature. The doctrine of original sin can still exist, but it can be communicated using different literary devices.

 

The Gospels seem very concerned with documenting history and give no indication that they are writing with symbolism, allegory, ect.

[SycamoreCircle]

Slavoj Zizek, the Slovenian philosopher, pondered "did the Greeks really believe their myths?" His answer was "yes, but maybe the way we believe in Santa Claus."

[BC1980]

 

Is the Book of Enoch a non canonized text? If so, then yes. This is fascinating BC! I will really have to check this out because haven't thought too much about non authorized writings. The story that you speak of is very popular.

 

Enoch is not canonized. There are several books accepted into the Catholic canon that are not part of the Protestant canon. Did you know that Martin Luther wanted to get rid of James?

 

I think you would find the Maccabees interesting. I believe there are 4 books, but they are not accepted in the Protestant canon. I believe they are accepted in the catholic canon. The books tell the story that inspired Hanukah.

[BC1980]

Peer reviewed means it has been published in a journal and that all the conclusions etc have been discussed and other people in that profession have access to all of the same evidence etc so that they can come to their own conclusions which will hopefully be the same conclusions as the original.

 

Otherwise it looks like picking and choosing of evidence and confirmation bias.

 

Basically, a scholarly journal accepted by members in the field. Not a magazine article. Beware of anything on the Internet. Books are good depending on the author.

[M30USA]

Enoch is not canonized. There are several books accepted into the Catholic canon that are not part of the Protestant canon. Did you know that Martin Luther wanted to get rid of James?

 

I think you would find the Maccabees interesting. I believe there are 4 books, but they are not accepted in the Protestant canon. I believe they are accepted in the catholic canon. The books tell the story that inspired Hanukah.

 

The book of Enoch and the book of Jashar are completely inspired. I am 100% convinced of this. I'm sure there are fraudulent books or non-inspired books, but those two are not among them. Even doubters agree that these two books stand at the top in regard to authenticity. They are even referenced or directly quoted in canonized Scripture. Yet they aren't accepted, at least in most denominations.

Edited December 27, 2014 by M30USA

[TheFinalWord]

They are even referenced or directly quoted in canonized Scripture. Yet they aren't accepted, at least in most denominations.

 

Paul also quotes Greek philosophers. Does that mean they are also inspired?

Acts 17. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’ “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill.

 

From the Cretan philosopher Epimenides

From the Cilician Stoic philosopher Aratus

 

Paul is using their own philosophers to show that since they are the offspring of God, they are obviously not made of gold or silver and thus should not worship idols made of gold and silver.

[BC1980]

The book of Enoch and the book of Jashar are completely inspired. I am 100% convinced of this. I'm sure there are fraudulent books or non-inspired books, but those two are not among them. Even doubters agree that these two books stand at the top in regard to authenticity. They are even referenced or directly quoted in canonized Scripture. Yet they aren't accepted, at least in most denominations.

 

I'm always very interested in the reason(s) why certain books weren't canonized, but I've found it hard to get much information. You see explanations in books on other subjects, but I'd love to read an entire book devoted to the canonization process.

[pureinheart]

Peer reviewed means it has been published in a journal and that all the conclusions etc have been discussed and other people in that profession have access to all of the same evidence etc so that they can come to their own conclusions which will hopefully be the same conclusions as the original.

 

Otherwise it looks like picking and choosing of evidence and confirmation bias.

 

Thanks Rydo:D

[pureinheart]

I'm always very interested in the reason(s) why certain books weren't canonized, but I've found it hard to get much information. You see explanations in books on other subjects, but I'd love to read an entire book devoted to the canonization process.

 

You know BC, I've never thought too much about this process and always thought 'canonization' was mainly to do with 'saints'. I know to be canonized a saint is a grueling process based on documentaries. So you opened up some new stuff for me:D

[pureinheart]

Enoch is not canonized. There are several books accepted into the Catholic canon that are not part of the Protestant canon. Did you know that Martin Luther wanted to get rid of James?

 

I think you would find the Maccabees interesting. I believe there are 4 books, but they are not accepted in the Protestant canon. I believe they are accepted in the catholic canon. The books tell the story that inspired Hanukah.

 

No I didn't know that BC, thank you:) I've heard of Maccabees before and will check it out.

 

You know, bringing up canonization and different beliefs in that, it brought to mind the age old war with the Protestant and the Catholics. A while back delved into what went on when the fight was fierce.

 

My dad was a history buff, in fact and 'everything' buff, a very knowledgeable person who was Irish. He tried to pass on his knowledge, but I was trying to figure out what was going on that day. Now I realize that without knowing how we got here one can't get a real grasp of 'today'...let's just say it's a major catch up, but I'll get there.

 

I really appreciate all of the knowledge you guys are passing on. I know it can sound lazy, but when you've got as much catching up as me...well, it's nice to be pointed in the right direction:)

[Rydo]

I'm saying that OT writers used the literary device of allegory to communicate a religious truth. I'm not saying that the use of allegory and metaphor renders the message untrue. I don't take the OT to be a history or science text. It is quite a rich source of ancient literature. The doctrine of original sin can still exist, but it can be communicated using different literary devices.

 

The Gospels seem very concerned with documenting history and give no indication that they are writing with symbolism, allegory, ect.

 

I guess that's possible. However its a very vague way to word a text that is supposedly important for saving you from eternal torment.

 

The whole idea of original sin seems illogical to me.

[BC1980]

I guess that's possible. However its a very vague way to word a text that is supposedly important for saving you from eternal torment.

 

Sure, it's possible. A writer can use any means at his/her disposal to get a point across. Even Jesus used parables. I think you have to discern between fact and truth when dealing with religion. I don't see the Bible as a textbook that is meant to teach us facts. It's a religious text meant to convey a truth about God and Jesus. The latter is difficult to quantify, which is why we have so many different denominations within the church. People's life experiences will always color how they read something.

 

You are right about it being vague. I often feel that it's unnecessarily vague. That brings up a whole new line of questioning for me. If God wants us to know Him, why be vague? What is the point and purpose? Did humans simply construct all of these religions in some attempt to understand God. Did we get it right? How do we know?

[BC1980]

No I didn't know that BC, thank you:) I've heard of Maccabees before and will check it out.

 

You know, bringing up canonization and different beliefs in that, it brought to mind the age old war with the Protestant and the Catholics. A while back delved into what went on when the fight was fierce.

 

My dad was a history buff, in fact and 'everything' buff, a very knowledgeable person who was Irish. He tried to pass on his knowledge, but I was trying to figure out what was going on that day. Now I realize that without knowing how we got here one can't get a real grasp of 'today'...let's just say it's a major catch up, but I'll get there.

 

I really appreciate all of the knowledge you guys are passing on. I know it can sound lazy, but when you've got as much catching up as me...well, it's nice to be pointed in the right direction:)

 

There's so much that I'd like to understand that it seems insurmountable. There's so much I don't understand. Canonization is so interesting to me because it's so human when you look at the selection process. It's sort of like pulling back the curtain on how we got the Bible as we know it today. I want to know who, why, and how.

[TheFinalWord]

I'm always very interested in the reason(s) why certain books weren't canonized, but I've found it hard to get much information. You see explanations in books on other subjects, but I'd love to read an entire book devoted to the canonization process.

 

You might start here

 

[BC1980]

You might start here

 

 

Awesome, thanks.

[M30USA]

Paul also quotes Greek philosophers. Does that mean they are also inspired?

Acts 17. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’ “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill.

 

From the Cretan philosopher Epimenides

From the Cilician Stoic philosopher Aratus

 

Paul is using their own philosophers to show that since they are the offspring of God, they are obviously not made of gold or silver and thus should not worship idols made of gold and silver.

 

Jude says Enoch "prophecied". Then went on to quote verbatim a verse in Enoch 1. Additionally, the early church theologians unanimously referred to Enoch as "Scripture".

[M30USA]

I'm always very interested in the reason(s) why certain books weren't canonized, but I've found it hard to get much information. You see explanations in books on other subjects, but I'd love to read an entire book devoted to the canonization process.

 

Many denominations include Enoch to this day. Interestingly, the group of Jews which took it OUT were the ones which rejected Jesus Christ--namely the Pharisees and Saduccees. Many American denominations merely followed suit.

 

My brother adopted a child from Ethiopia who is a member of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The book of Enoch is included in their canon. This church claims ancestry from the Essene Jews (the true line), of which John the Baptist and Jesus were part of.

Edited December 27, 2014 by M30USA

[autumnnight]

For me, it depends on what one means by the word "literal."

 

Do I believe that God literally created the universe? Yes. Do I believe it was literally 6 24 hour days? I'm not sure.

 

Do I believe that those creatures Revelation talks about will literally be grasshoppers? nah. Do I believe there will literally be a giant fat woman who is named the whore of Babylon? No.

 

I think there is symbolism in the Bible. There is definitely allegory (I mean, that is basically what parables are).

 

However, there are some things that I DO believe are non-negotiable. The Bible says Jesus was born of a virgin. I believe it means....Jesus was born of a virgin. The Bible says that He literally, physically died. I believe that means He literally physically died. The Bible says He literally, physically rose from the dead. I believe it means that is what He did.

 

Scripture is crystal clear that there is ONE way - Jesus is THE way, THE truth, and THE life, and no man comes to the Father except through Him. I believe that means exactly what it says. Romans 3:23 says that all have sinned, and Romans 6:23 says that the wages of sin is death. I believe that to be true as well.

 

I even believe the politically incorrect stuff, like Romans 1, Jude, Ephesians 5, Proverbs 31, etc.

 

For me, it is a matter of deciding whether or not to place my faith in a God who is a liar or a trickster. If I can only trust PART of what He says and I cant be sure which parts....then why in the world would I trust Him at all? I wouldn't trust a person who told me half truths and made me figure out which things they really meant. To me, that is totally illogical.

[youngskywalker]

You made a lot of sense and I just want to say that I think God has a sense of humor. We know there is definitive interpretation concerning the entire Bible, yet God does not spell much out, He wants us to dig deep into His word along with discussing it throwing out our ideas and opinions.

 

The hardest book for me to understand was the Book of Revelations. That is one book that I studied from cover to cover, but it was so many years ago that I can't remember all that was learned.

 

If I cared, and needed to have a view point on revelation I would be a preterist. One who believes that the book of revelation symbolically described the fall of Israel. All of revelation has been fullfilled. A good study is to look at old testament prophesies and the language that they use. The student will also find that all O.T prophesy were directed to the living generation and it was fulfilled. What people do after that is up to their imagination. That is why there is so many crazy half baked ideas about the end of the world and why Jesus hasn't returned 2000 years later. He returned at the first destruction of the temple (just as he promised) while the same generation was alive. ... if he did return at all that is.

Edited December 28, 2014 by youngskywalker

[TheFinalWord]

Awesome, thanks.

 

This is a pretty good book

 

Christianbook.com: The Canon of Scripture: F.F. Bruce: 9780830812585