My friend, if my father told me to be at home this Wednesday at 5:30 in the morning. Is there room for interpretation? I don’t see it, nor do I see it in Genesis 1, unless I don’t want to see what is plainly there and want to interpret it some other way.
Sure. Where is “home”? What time zone is being referred to? Is this a request or a command? None of those things are obvious by just the meaning of the words. You need a shared context between yourself and your father to understand. And this example actually relates really well to Scripture interpretation. Since we are removed from the original authors and audience and their shared context, we don’t always know what they knew. Whereas it might be perfectly clear to you what your father means by “Be home this Wednesday at 5:30 in the morning” when he says it to you in a context, it’s meaning will be not as clear for me if I read it three years from now and I don’t know where your home is or when exactly the directive was spoken. I will have to do some guesswork to reconstruct what your father meant and what you understood. It works the same way with the biblical texts.
3 Likes
LOL…Ya I knew you would use that argument, unfortunately it would never work with my father 
No offense, but that is your issue. My camp has zero problem in harmonizing science and a plainly read Genesis 1
I’m not trying to argue, I’m just stating facts about how people understand language. You can deny that you are actually interpreting when you come up with your “plain reading,” but that doesn’t change the fact that it is an interpretation. Instead of denying it, you should focus on convincing people why it is the best interpretation.
3 Likes
My friend, I didn’t say you are arguing.
Why would I convince people of something that is blatantly obvious. When I share my faith I tell people to test me and go read the bible, starting with Genesis. I am confident without any presupposition how old they think the earth is, they will see 6 literal 24 hour days in their reading. I do not have to prep them to read Genesis 1. Them accepting it is a another matter, but that is what they will see what the bible is conveying.
It is not obvious to me, nor do I see the harmony with science and a literal reading that you are so confident is there.
But, it you are happy with your interpretation, and it works fine for your evangelism efforts, why are you here on this website?
1 Like
Well, perhaps he is looking for love in all the wrong places.
(google wookin pa nub if you don’t already get it)
3 Likes
It isn’t moot, for the reasons already given; it’s an example of people misunderstanding something Jesus said which he didn’t intend to be taken literally, and which he didn’t explain wasn’t to be taken literally… And you are not using the word “reiterate” properly.
1 Like
Hello Wookin.
How is it “blatantly obvious” when you have three days that don’t have a sun, and three that do? How is it plainly understood, when light is created before the Sun, and yet you have evenings and mornings on all six days? What does it mean when God called the light “Day”, and the darkness “Night” … if it’s describing “day and night” cycles, then what’s the purpose of the creation of Sun and Moon later on, if time is already being measured for the first three days (Genesis 1:14 … "and let them (the lights) be for signs, for seasons, and for DAYS, and years) …[quote=“Wookin_Panub, post:47, topic:5504”]
Them accepting it is a another matter, but that is what they will see what the bible is conveying.
[/quote]
I don’t believe Augustine or Origen would agree with you, and it is certainly wasn’t plain to me when I read Genesis 1 for the first time (and that’s when I already had a YEC approach to scripture) …
I believe we would all do better to discuss biblical matters amongst believers, and fellow brothers and sisters, with a sense of humility and understanding of other people’s viewpoints … saying something is “blatantly obvious” and thus implying there’s no reason to defend your interpretation, in my mind, doesn’t inspire meaningful dialogue …
6 Likes
Very well stated, Christy! I would like to add to your thoughts by bringing up the misunderstanding proposed by idioms. The dictionary definition is the following: “a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words”
In English, if I were to write the sentence, “My neighbor kicked the bucket last week.” … if you’re an American you’ll probably understand that I mean, “My neighbor died last week” … but why is that? If I look up the word “kicked” in the dictionary, it has nothing to do with death … the same is true if I look up the word “bucket” … and even if I arrange the words into the action being described “kicked the bucket”, there’s no death implication at all … and yet it’s something that’s mutually understood by a group of people, in a specific language, culture, and time, to mean something totally different than what you would expect. Were a German or Japanese individual to encounter this sentence, they would probably be scratching their heads, as to what I’m saying.
In the Bible, likewise, there are many use of idioms like in Psalm 11:6 “Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup.” … it took me a little bit of time to realize that “portion of their cup” meant “destiny” … and in the same manner this isn’t immediately by dissecting it by word-for-word definitions …
1 Like
And didn’t Jesus tell us to cut off our hands if they offended us?
1 Like
That’s a pretty unusual explanation. The usual explanation is how can spiritual people feel strongly about giving pagan money to the Temple … the image of Caesar on the coin shows that the money is not of God … but of Caesar.
Beautiful parallel, if you ask me
Ya, no. Jesus never told us to cut off our hands
It is quite simple. Scripture that you are judging and not my interpretation of scripture, does not make sense to you, because it does not fit your model. It fits mine perfectly
These men were brilliant bible scholars, but they were not infallible. Furthermore, even though I love Augustine, I don’t agree with everything he writes[/quote]
That’s because, like many Christians already have preconceived ideas.
I have been civil and tried to use loving tones, but I do not respect theistic evolution or any other type of evolutionary framework. No more than I love my Catholic brothers and sisters but stand firm on “work righteousness” Anything that I believe compromises the gospel or degrades the authority of scripture is not tolerated by me. I am sorry if you din’t want to hear that, my friend 
Mark 9:43, Matthew 5:30. Couple this with your insistence that the Bible only teaches that slavery is a sin, I get the impression that you aren’t all that familiar with its actual contents.
3 Likes
So if I gouged out my eyes. Will that stop me from sinning? I mean, I still have memories. Will I have to cut out my brain as well? but that would mean self murder. Would it not, and a sin. Jesus never made a mandate to cut off our hands. It’s a metaphor. Genesis 1 is not a metaphor
Control yourself, Beaglelady. Don’t touch that one, as tempting as it is.
tsk…tsk…tsk…behave yourself
Let’s get this straight (and hold you to your own standards). Mark 9:43 doesn’t say anything about “only do this if you think it will work to stop you from sinning”. It just says to do it if it causes you to sin. But you come along and tell us that we don’t have to listen to that now because it’s only a metaphor. Sure --I’m totally with you on the metaphor part; I hope to keep my appendages. But Jesus didn’t clarify that this was a metaphor. It just says to do it. Plain reading – no funny interpretation or “metaphor” spins to get you off the hook! I’m looking to see where Jesus clarifies that this is just a figure of speech or a metaphor … coming up totally empty! I’m just plainly reading what the Scriptures say here! But you, my friend, are you putting your own interpretive spin on Scriptures here and placing your word above God’s?!
3 Likes