Most of these Christians do not disagree about the general meaning of the Word of God though. I think if you look carefully you'd be surprised.It's like the Protestants bitching about the Catholics doing away with the Latin Mass. Or the lapsed Catholics complaining that the priests are not doing the folk liturgy in the right way, or yes, atheists worrying about the interpretation of scriptures. — Bitter Crank
You have to follow the Biblical story from beginning to end. Without understanding the whole, you cannot understand the part. You have to look at the entire picture that is painted. The Bible is like a puzzle - if you look at pieces separately, you won't be able to distinguish the real meaning. And then you must also understand the Judaic culture in which the Bible was written. This is a very good resource:But you imply an understanding of a meaning that's lacking, probably, in some people. What meaning is that? — tim wood
Accordingly, with regards to texts, God's text can't defy the inherent qualities of texts. So, if such an inherent quality is that meaning presupposes interpretation, then it's incoherent ("not even wrong") to expect a divine text to be free on interpretation. Note, also, that this doesn't necessarily mean that there can be no definitive interpretation. — Πετροκότσυφας
No Christian claims they are the words of God. The Bible is divinely inspired, not written by God like the Qu'ran claims to be. So I think you're confusing two different claims.Some people claim these are God's words — tim wood
Yep, but again, to break everything into pieces and analyze them separately is to fail to see the meaning of the whole. You asked what is the meaning of the Word of God? A short answer for that is Christ. But yet, you cannot find Christ by looking atomically at each individual sentence extracted from its context. You must look at the overarching meaning of the entire narrative."In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." This text is well-known. As to what it says, I think it's reasonably transparent. — tim wood
That doesn't follow. Interpretation is the process by which the meaning of the text is understood.Interpretation, on the other hand, adds to or counters the text, either or both. In short, interpretation makes (the) text something other than it is. — tim wood
You have to follow the Biblical story from beginning to end. Without understanding the whole, you cannot understand the part. — Agustino
A non-question. You don't understand any part of the puzzle, but you do understand how they can fit together, and once every piece is in place suddenly - insight strikes - you get the meaning.If I cannot understand any part, on what fulcrum do I lever myself into an understanding of the whole - which apparently is not gained by parts, but only as a whole? — tim wood
Yep, just like a puzzle. And meaning is always more than the sum of the words. Meaning isn't the same as the words, I think you understand that. The meaning of "fire" isn't the letters that compose the word. That's why the same meanings can sometimes be conveyed by very different words. The letters have no intrinsic/necessary connection to the meaning. Neither do the words for that matter.And closer to the point, it would appear you argue that the Bible (perhaps all books) are more than the some of the parts - the words. — tim wood
Many people, most Christians for example.I agree that understanding can vary, but whoever understood the whole? — tim wood
When did interpretation ever become part of the Bible? — tim wood
At the very beginning.
How do you think the Bible came into existence? You must think the High Priest of the Temple went into the Holy of Holies one Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) and found a stack of scrolls on the Mercy Seat with a Post-It Note™ stuck to it saying, "Hot off the press -- the Old Testament. Hope you like it. Love, YHWH ps: working on New Testament now" — Bitter Crank
Several African origins myths are almost exactly like genesis, and hundreds if not thousands of years earlier. — Sir2u
The last bloody thing I would want would to be a god. But I would bet that given his supposed powers I could probably do better. — Sir2u
The Cohens, Kahns, Cahanes, Levites... these Jewish names are connected to the priestly caste of Israel, and there are genetic similarities linking the various families.
Nothing to do with the price of matzo ball soup, but interesting. — Bitter Crank
Makes you want to read Joseph Campbell! — Sir2u
Nothing to do with the price of matzo ball soup — Sir2u
Primordial soup
Blame that one on Heinz. — Sir2u
Sure, if you consider the tree that I see outside to be only my opinion, then you can say this too is only my opinion. :-} The truth is that all Christians have believed this to be so, so whether it's actually true, it certainly isn't "only my opinion". To say it is is to be ridiculous.This is only your opinion of what the bible is, how you interpret it. — Sir2u
I don't think you understand exactly what it says, that is precisely the problem. You think this understanding what it says is a straightforward matter that involves just reading the words. That's not true, anymore than you can understand what "Fire!" means just by reading that word.Personally I think the bible means to say exactly what it says and anything you add to it as "meaning" is actually a corruption of the original writing. — Sir2u
I never talked about a hidden meaning. I referenced hidden things that are revealed by the Biblical text. That's why other areas - art, science, philosophy etc. - need to be interpreted in the light of Biblical revelation.People that try to find hidden meaning — Sir2u
That's your non-expert opinion ;) - to adopt one of your favorite tropes X-)They have not got a bloody clue either. — Sir2u
A god that leaves his followers in a daze about what he meant should be disqualified as a god for incompetence.
— Sir2u
Do you think you could do any better with no experience of the job? — BlueBanana
The Biblical story is not a myth. And this isn't only because the Biblical story is true (whereas myths are false), but rather because it serves exactly the opposite function to that of myth. It is true that the Biblical story is dressed in the clothes of myths, but its function is not obfuscation and removal of traces of the founding violence of culture and society - but rather their revelation. This is the reason why the Bible cannot but be inspired by a transcendent God - the Bible cannot come from humans, its source cannot be immanent.Yep, funny how ancient human cultures devise similar myths in different regions. Some may have been influenced by others (Israelite traditions definitely influenced by previous Babylonian myths, etc.). Makes you want to read Joseph Campbell! — schopenhauer1
This opinion is hardly worth even refutation. If you cannot see the intricacies and wisdom of Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, or the Book of Job to name just three books of the Bible - and perceive that these texts could not under any circumstances be written by stupid and uneducated men and women, then you're just deluding yourself.I am with Sir2u on the issue. The bible is so badly written, with so many infactuals, so many logical impossibilities, that one's hair stands on end when one thinks it has been inspired by a god.
In my private opinion the bible was written by uneducated, stupid men and women, and there is nothing godly about it. It is a badly written book for guidance and knowledge, and that's about the size of it. — szardosszemagad
A text is revelatory if its meaning shows or points to things that are otherwise hidden. The Biblical text does this.As Thomas Paine (not an atheist) pointed out, if any text is revelatory, it is only revelatory to the person that witnessed God directly speaking those words. To anybody else, it is just hearsay. — andrewk
I never talked about a hidden meaning. I referenced hidden things that are revealed by the Biblical text. That's why other areas - art, science, philosophy etc. - need to be interpreted in the light of Biblical revelation. — Agustino
So you claim. Like I (or rather, Mr Paine) said, hearsay.A text is revelatory if its meaning shows or points to things that are otherwise hidden. The Biblical text does this. — Agustino
This sounds similar to the claims in the preface of my Quran, which say that the numerological patterns in the surahs, the language etc, are so intricate that they could not have been constructed by any human - hence they must have been written by Allah.If you cannot see the intricacies and wisdom of Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, or the Book of Job to name just three books of the Bible - and perceive that these texts could not under any circumstances be written by stupid and uneducated men and women, then you're just deluding yourself. — Agustino
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.