pajarito 0
philh 0
Its interesting that Christians tell us the bible doesnt mean what it says when they dont like what it says
Ok... How do you figure out what's truth and what's metaphor? Or is it that when it's something that you agree with, it's truth, and if it's something you disagree with, it's hyperbole or about something else? I'm not picking on you, Paj, I just see this a lot. People pick and choose what's literally true and what's metaphor. For example, most christians don't follow the dietary requirements of the old testament, saying that they were there to protect ancient peoples from foodborne illnesses and are no longer needed. How do we know there isn't something morally wrong about a cheeseburger? Should it really be for us to decide that part of the bible doesn't apply?
pajarito 0
QuoteIts interesting that Christians tell us the bible doesnt mean what it says when they dont like what it says
Other examples of hyperbole in the Bible:
- By my God I can leap over a wall” (Ps. 18:29)
- I beat [my enemies] fine as dust before the wind” (Ps. 18:42)
- A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come near you” (Ps. 91:7)
- You are all together beautiful, my love; there is no flaw in you” (Song 4:7)
- The wicked “cannot sleep unless they have done wrong; they are robbed of sleep unless they have made someone stumble” (Prov. 4:16)
- When you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing” (Matt. 6:3)
- It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God” (Matt. 19:24)
- The Kingdom of God “is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his garden, and it grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air made nests in its branches” (Luke 13:19).
luke 14:26:
Hate or hyperbole?
Rebecca 0
Not all hyperbole.
Some are metaphor, some are similie.
I don't know what this is: "You are all together beautiful, my love; there is no flaw in you” (Song 4:7), but it's not hyperbole. And it's true as far as God is concerned.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
Some are metaphor, some are similie.
I don't know what this is: "You are all together beautiful, my love; there is no flaw in you” (Song 4:7), but it's not hyperbole. And it's true as far as God is concerned.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
pajarito 0
QuoteOk... How do you figure out what's truth and what's metaphor? Or is it that when it's something that you agree with, it's truth, and if it's something you disagree with, it's hyperbole or about something else? I'm not picking on you, Paj, I just see this a lot. People pick and choose what's literally true and what's metaphor. For example, most christians don't follow the dietary requirements of the old testament, saying that they were there to protect ancient peoples from foodborne illnesses and are no longer needed. How do we know there isn't something morally wrong about a cheeseburger? Should it really be for us to decide that part of the bible doesn't apply?
You've got to read the text in its proper context understanding who it was written to, the literary style present, meaning in its original Greek, what the writer intended to say, etc. If you read that chapter (I'm sure you have already; I mean that seriously), it's pretty obvious that he was using hyperbole to make a point. Especially given his pattern throughout the Gospels. That chapter is also full of other hypothetical examples. I wholeheartedy agree that we shouldn't "pick and choose" to suite our purposes as you said. As far as Old Testament law versus New Testament law, we've been over the differences already before. I'm sure you remember. It's dangerous to "pick and choose" versus out of the Bible and assign meaning without studying the ones before and after. Cults do this all the time.
pajarito 0
QuoteNot all hyperbole.
Some are metaphor, some are similie.
I don't know what this is: "You are all together beautiful, my love; there is no flaw in you” (Song 4:7), but it's not hyperbole. And it's true as far as God is concerned.
....Ok......
Point being that not all are literal. Examples are being made to emphasize a teaching.
Rebecca 0
QuoteQuoteNot all hyperbole.
Some are metaphor, some are similie.
I don't know what this is: "You are all together beautiful, my love; there is no flaw in you” (Song 4:7), but it's not hyperbole. And it's true as far as God is concerned.
....Ok......
Point being that not all are literal. Examples are being made to emphasize a teaching.
OK, point being, who decides what is literal? There are some who try to convince others it's ALL literal. There are some who say it's ALL example or metaphor. Kinda screws things up in translation.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
pajarito 0
QuoteShould it really be for us to decide that part of the bible doesn't apply?
It's our job to figure out the meaning and intent and whether it should apply or not. You can't always just take things at face value. That should appeal to someone like yourself.
QuoteThe commands of the Old Testament are divided generally into moral law, ceremonial law and civil law. The moral law (i.e. the 10 commandments) remain in effect and few people would question that. The ceremonial law (sacrificing 2 oxen, etc.) was fulfilled in Jesus' sacrificial death and the New Testament teaches that it is not binding anymore. The civil law (stoning for adultery, etc.) was the law of the nation of Israel, which operated as a Theocracy, and is not the civil law of any other nation.
billvon 2,991
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>It's our job to figure out the meaning and intent and whether it
> should apply or not. You can't always just take things at face value.
> That should appeal to someone like yourself.
I think that is exactly right. I think the only place we disagree is that I think other people's interpretations are as valid as yours, even if they contradict things that you believe.
> should apply or not. You can't always just take things at face value.
> That should appeal to someone like yourself.
I think that is exactly right. I think the only place we disagree is that I think other people's interpretations are as valid as yours, even if they contradict things that you believe.
pajarito 0
QuoteOK, point being, who decides what is literal? There are some who try to convince others it's ALL literal. There are some who say it's ALL example or metaphor. Kinda screws things up in translation.
Through the practice of hermeneutics. Like I said before, one has to take into account more than just the face value of a word they find in scripture.
Rebecca 0
QuoteQuoteShould it really be for us to decide that part of the bible doesn't apply?
It's our job to figure out the meaning and intent and whether it should apply or not. You can't always just take things at face value. That should appeal to someone like yourself.QuoteThe commands of the Old Testament are divided generally into moral law, ceremonial law and civil law. The moral law (i.e. the 10 commandments) remain in effect and few people would question that. The ceremonial law (sacrificing 2 oxen, etc.) was fulfilled in Jesus' sacrificial death and the New Testament teaches that it is not binding anymore. The civil law (stoning for adultery, etc.) was the law of the nation of Israel, which operated as a Theocracy, and is not the civil law of any other nation.
But what about sheep-people who want to be told and lead by another, and what if that person is really bad at figuring out the meaning and intent? There are a lot of sheep who can't tell a good shepard from bad.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
Rebecca 0
QuoteQuoteOK, point being, who decides what is literal? There are some who try to convince others it's ALL literal. There are some who say it's ALL example or metaphor. Kinda screws things up in translation.
Through the practice of hermeneutics. Like I said before, one has to take into account more than just the face value of a word they find in scripture.
Fully agreed. One does have to do that.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
pajarito 0
QuoteBut what about sheep-people who want to be told and lead by another, and what if that person is really bad at figuring out the meaning and intent? There are a lot of sheep who can't tell a good shepard from bad.
That happens a lot but what has that got to do with the need for proper and thorough Biblical discernment?
pajarito 0
Quote>It's our job to figure out the meaning and intent and whether it
> should apply or not. You can't always just take things at face value.
> That should appeal to someone like yourself.
I think that is exactly right. I think the only place we disagree is that I think other people's interpretations are as valid as yours, even if they contradict things that you believe.
Someone reads and interprets only this. They determine based only on this verse that Jesus is advocating that one should hate his/her family in order to follow him (which by the way violates the 5th Commandment).
QuoteIf any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."
Luke 14:26
Someone else reads the entire passage in order to gain the reader’s intent and meaning. He/she interprets that Jesus is using a literary style in order to emphasize a point. He/she determines that Jesus is using exaggeration in order to demonstrate the…
“Cost of Being a Disciple.”
QuoteLarge crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it? For if he lays the foundation and is not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, saying, 'This fellow began to build and was not able to finish.' Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple. "Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out. "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."
Luke 14:25-35
Can both interpretations be correct? Is it all just “whatever it means to whomever reads it?” Do you apply that same concept to your studies?
This chapter is really dealing with false prophets and capital punishment.
***Very early in human history, God decreed that murderers were to forfeit their own lives: “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he the man” (Genesis 9:6). This standard continued into the Mosaic period (cf. Numbers 35:33). As a matter of fact, the law God gave to Moses to regulate the Israelite nation made provision for at least sixteen capital crimes. In sixteen instances, the death penalty was to be invoked. The first four may be categorized as pertaining to civil matters.
This is called hyperbole. A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton. God doesn't want you to hate your family. He's just illustrating the depth of how your love for him should be based on the depth of love he has for you.