Jump to content

Literal Interpretation or Allegory (The Bible)


Recommended Posts

A member brought up some things that I think are cool to explore. For instance, did Jonah really end up in the belly of a whale? Did creation take place in six calendar days? Did the Tower of Babel really exist? Is Satan a metaphor?

 

Did the Bible 'stories' get distorted over time? Wasn't it the Dead Sea Scrolls that basically confirmed the actual accounts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was originally meant to be literal but since it doesn't actually fit in to any current knowledge of history, the universe, science etc it's been changed to metaphor.

 

Similar to the stories of Thor and Odin, Zeus, Jupiter etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
I think it was originally meant to be literal but since it doesn't actually fit in to any current knowledge of history, the universe, science etc it's been changed to metaphor.

 

Similar to the stories of Thor and Odin, Zeus, Jupiter etc.

 

I think much like Ezekiel in this description of his dream/vision Ezekiel 1:16 This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. was interpreting what he saw with the knowledge of that day, much like John and the Book of Revelations.

 

Archeology is an important tool IMO

 

 

Archaeologists are digging up bible stories!!!

 

How Archaeology Proves the Bible : Prevail Magazine

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Did the Bible 'stories' get distorted over time? Wasn't it the Dead Sea Scrolls that basically confirmed the actual accounts?

 

I think the Dead Sea Scrolls showed that versions of OT texts changed a good bit over time. I seem to rember something about that, but I might be wrong. I know that the oldest versions of the Gospels are pretty much the same and haven't changed much over time. I think it boils down to the OT tradition mainly being oral and not canonized until around the 1st century. Don't know the exact date. Maybe someone else can help out with the dates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
I think the Dead Sea Scrolls showed that versions of OT texts changed a good bit over time. I seem to rember something about that, but I might be wrong. I know that the oldest versions of the Gospels are pretty much the same and haven't changed much over time. I think it boils down to the OT tradition mainly being oral and not canonized until around the 1st century. Don't know the exact date. Maybe someone else can help out with the dates.

 

Most fascinating, I'll dig a little deeper as I haven't really explored this aspect concerning the DSS.

 

One member noted in a past thread the interesting fact that the DSS were discovered in the same timeframe as Israel became a nation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think much like Ezekiel in this description of his dream/vision Ezekiel 1:16 This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. was interpreting what he saw with the knowledge of that day, much like John and the Book of Revelations.

 

Archeology is an important tool IMO

 

 

Archaeologists are digging up bible stories!!!

 

How Archaeology Proves the Bible : Prevail Magazine

 

 

 

I can't take those sources seriously. Sorry.

 

Peer reviewed or nothing for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it was originally meant to be literal but since it doesn't actually fit in to any current knowledge of history, the universe, science etc it's been changed to metaphor.

 

Similar to the stories of Thor and Odin, Zeus, Jupiter etc.

 

I actually think many of the OT stories were originally written as allegories. The creation story, in particular, seems very clearly to be an allegory in my mind. The literature from those time periods is scant, but there's no reason not to believe that writers (storytellers) weren't sophisticated enough to use allegory, metaphor, ect. Allegories usually comment on politics or morality, so why not comment on religion? It just makes sense to me.

 

What's truly interesting is the mixing of genres. It seems like the books about the kings and the Jewish laws in the first 5 books are meant to be literal, but the authors are still weaving in a lot of allegory and symbolism. I think their mindset must have been very different than ours. They seem more interested in communicating a religious truth as opposed to facts.

 

Something else that has always interested me is how different the OT and NT are in terms of genre. I have no idea why that is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it was originally meant to be literal but since it doesn't actually fit in to any current knowledge of history, the universe, science etc it's been changed to metaphor.

 

Similar to the stories of Thor and Odin, Zeus, Jupiter etc.

 

I think something we also have to contend with is that many ancient religions have similar myths. For example, most ancient religions have creation and flood myths. It's not at all uncommon to find a flood myth similar to Noah's story in other ancient religions. The Epic of Gligamesh is probably the most famous flood myth that predates Noah and is quite similar. The OT writers might have been using generic myths circulated at the time to explain their religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
One member noted in a past thread the interesting fact that the DSS were discovered in the same timeframe as Israel became a nation.

 

That is true. They were discovered in 1948 maybe? I'd have to look it up. I think the oldest scroll of Isaiah was found with the DSS.

 

Have you ever studied any non-canonized texts? I think some of them are worth reading. I'm very interested in the canonization process of both Old and New Testaments. I think it's very interesting how closely the oldest NT texts are to the present version. Of course, there are some stories that don't appear in the oldest versions, like the ending of Mark and the story of the adulteress Jesus drug into the temple. I'm pretty sure I'm right about the famous adulteress story (Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone) not being in the oldest versions, which is too bad because it's a good story.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A member brought up some things that I think are cool to explore. For instance, did Jonah really end up in the belly of a whale? Did creation take place in six calendar days? Did the Tower of Babel really exist? Is Satan a metaphor?

 

Did the Bible 'stories' get distorted over time? Wasn't it the Dead Sea Scrolls that basically confirmed the actual accounts?

 

That is a complicated question.

 

For example, the Hebrew word for day, "yom", has several literal definitions. 24 hour period is only one of three literal definitions: 12 hours, 24 hours, long period of time.

 

Some reasons why it is not interpreted as 24 hours is that the sun itself was not created until day 4, so how can the first three days be only 24 hours? Also, day 7 has not yet ended.

 

These nuances are important because both Paul and Jesus even used single, inspired words to build doctrine (inspiration is both plenary and verbal).

 

Galatians 3:16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many; but, referring to one, “And to your offspring,” which is Christ.

Edited by TheFinalWord
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
I can't take those sources seriously. Sorry.

 

Peer reviewed or nothing for me.

 

Ok, coo ...is there any publication you would take seriously?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
That is a complicated question.

 

For example, the Hebrew word for day, "yom", has several literal definitions. 24 hour period is only one of three literal definitions: 12 hours, 24 hours, long period of time.

 

Some reasons why it is not interpreted as 24 hours is that the sun itself was not created until day 4, so how can the first three days be only 24 hours? Also, day 7 has not yet ended.

 

These nuances are important because both Paul and Jesus even used single, inspired words to build doctrine (inspiration is both plenary and verbal).

 

Galatians 3:16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many; but, referring to one, “And to your offspring,” which is Christ.

 

Most definitely, this is why I felt this would be an awesome discussion/debate.

 

In instances where 'words' are used such as the word 'love' (please correct me on this as it's been a while and I may not describe it properly) it's good to refer to Hebrew (O/T) or Greek (N/T) to get the full meaning of what the Lord is communicating in the particular verse.

 

Bold- this is interesting, are you saying that 'day 7' has not ended yet. If this is what you are saying, it truly would be a fascinating concept.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Ok, coo ...is there any publication you would take seriously?

 

Rydo, I meant to add that I don't know what you mean by 'peer reviewed'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
That is true. They were discovered in 1948 maybe? I'd have to look it up. I think the oldest scroll of Isaiah was found with the DSS.

 

Have you ever studied any non-canonized texts? I think some of them are worth reading. I'm very interested in the canonization process of both Old and New Testaments. I think it's very interesting how closely the oldest NT texts are to the present version. Of course, there are some stories that don't appear in the oldest versions, like the ending of Mark and the story of the adulteress Jesus drug into the temple. I'm pretty sure I'm right about the famous adulteress story (Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone) not being in the oldest versions, which is too bad because it's a good story.

 

The member that brought this to light feels that the actual date was 1947...most have always known the date to be 1948, it's the date I've always known.

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
youngskywalker
Ok, coo ...is there any publication you would take seriously?

 

To interject, I take the bible seriously. I just don't take it as the inerrant word of God.

 

Now as far as the creation days go, they have to be taken as literal six days. One day can't be equal to 1000 years or 100,000 years. This is because the bible specically teaches that death came as a result of Adams sin. God couldn't have used evolution as an an example. To say so would be opening up a can of worms theologically speaking. Death (suffering) could not have happened before the fall.

 

I do suppose you could take the whole story as an allegory. That is how I would believe it if I had to and I cared; but if it was allegorical then what's the point? Anyone could interpret it however they wanted and nobody could interject. Thus, even this discussion would be pointless because everyone's interpretation would be valid. Just make it say whatever you want it to.

 

Does that make sense or am I insane?

Edited by youngskywalker
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
To interject, I take the bible seriously. I just don't take it as the inerrant word of God.

 

Now as far as the creation days go, they have to be taken as literal six days. One day can't be equal to 1000 years or 100,000 years. This is because the bible specically teaches that death came as a result of Adams sin. God couldn't have used evolution as an an example. To say so would be opening up a can of worms theologically speaking. Death (suffering) could not have happened before the fall.

 

I do suppose you could take the whole story as an allegory. That is how I would believe it if I had to and I cared; but if it was allegorical then what's the point? Anyone could interpret it however they wanted and nobody could interject. Thus, even this discussion would be pointless because everyone's interpretation would be valid. Just make it say whatever you want it to.

 

Does that make sense or am I insane?

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In instances where 'words' are used such as the word 'love' (please correct me on this as it's been a while and I may not describe it properly) it's good to refer to Hebrew (O/T) or Greek (N/T) to get the full meaning of what the Lord is communicating in the particular verse.

 

Yes, this is referred to as sentential inspiration. In other words it is the Hebrew and Greek sentences (linguistic utterances) that are inspired not propositional content (e.g. the English translation of the bible).

 

Bold- this is interesting, are you saying that 'day 7' has not ended yet. If this is what you are saying, it truly would be a fascinating concept.

 

That is one of the cases that is made. There are a number of scriptural evidences leading to this (please note, these evidences, along with the duration of the yoms in Genesis, have been argued long before earth sciences validated the age of the earth through empirical evidence; Augustine wrote a volume on this topic called the literal interpretation of Genesis around 400 AD).

 

One point is the literary device "evening/morning" used to describe the other six days of creation is not used for day seven.

 

There are also several passages that imply the seventh day is ongoing...

 

Hebrews 4:

 

Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it. For we also have had the good news proclaimed to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because they did not share the faith of those who obeyed. Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,“So I declared on oath in my anger, ‘They shall never enter my rest.’”And yet his works have been finished since the creation of the world. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “On the seventh day God rested from all his works.”And again in the passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.” Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest, and since those who formerly had the good news proclaimed to them did not go in because of their disobedience, God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.” For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience. For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

 

Now as far as the creation days go, they have to be taken as literal six days.

 

It's important to realize that there are two other literal definitions of the Hebrew word yom: 12-hours and long period of time.

 

Death (suffering) could not have happened before the fall.

 

May I ask why?

Edited by TheFinalWord
Link to post
Share on other sites

The account of Jesus' life on earth is, to me, the most far-fetched story in the bible. What he claimed to be, what he did, and what happened to him are so difficult to grasp. Like the idea that the creator of the whole universe was somehow contained in a human (even a little baby); the fact that miraculous healings were taking place; people walking on water; and of course, the resurrection.

 

If I can believe that those things literally took place (and that belief is central to the Christian faith), why couldn't I believe in other seemingly outlandish things?

 

Not that I'm committed either way. There many great arguments for non-literal interpretations of some things in the bible (as TFW has wonderfully shared <<< LIKE :p).

 

 

Now as far as the creation days go, they have to be taken as literal six days. One day can't be equal to 1000 years or 100,000 years. This is because the bible specically teaches that death came as a result of Adams sin. God couldn't have used evolution as an an example. To say so would be opening up a can of worms theologically speaking. Death (suffering) could not have happened before the fall.

 

I do suppose you could take the whole story as an allegory. That is how I would believe it if I had to and I cared; but if it was allegorical then what's the point? Anyone could interpret it however they wanted and nobody could interject. Thus, even this discussion would be pointless because everyone's interpretation would be valid. Just make it say whatever you want it to.

 

Does that make sense or am I insane?

 

I like how you say an allegory would be wide open for interpretation. Heck, even verifiable events are open to interpretation.

 

But the first paragraph went right over my head.

 

 

I can't take those sources seriously. Sorry.

 

Peer reviewed or nothing for me.

 

Rydo, I completely get what you're saying. Given that this is a forum for discussion and not scientific research, sometimes we have to take things with a grain of salt, and I think it's only fair to give things a chance.

 

For example, I think the last video highlights a lot of stuff being done in the academic/scientific field of archeology. If you're interested in further study on the topic, it might be good to start looking into some of the finds mentioned. You might be surprised at what you learn!

Edited by pie2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Some reasons why it is not interpreted as 24 hours is that the sun itself was not created until day 4, so how can the first three days be only 24 hours? Also, day 7 has not yet ended.

 

It's possible that God, himself, was the light source before the sun and stars were created. This very thing will take place when God returns to live with us again, as prophecied in Revelation. It basically says God, himself, will be our literal light source.

 

One reason I am very cautious to abandon the literal 24 hour interpretation is because, for each day, it makes a specific point to repeat that there was evening and there was morning.

 

FYI, I am a Gap Theorist. I don't believe the "6 days" refer to creation but rather to the remaking of earth. An unspecified period of time, I believe, existed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. I also believe races of beings existed on earth before Adam, including the angelic race.

Edited by M30USA
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Yes, this is referred to as sentential inspiration. In other words it is the Hebrew and Greek sentences (linguistic utterances) that are inspired not propositional content (e.g. the English translation of the bible).

 

Thank you so much TFW, I've never heard these terms before. Have they changed, or is this more in-depth?

 

That is one of the cases that is made. There are a number of scriptural evidences leading to this (please note, these evidences, along with the duration of the yoms in Genesis, have been argued long before earth sciences validated the age of the earth through empirical evidence; Augustine wrote a volume on this topic called the literal interpretation of Genesis around 400 AD).

 

This is a total trip, I really thought you would say you were referring to something else and I misunderstood... going to read Augustines writings on this, it sounds beyond interesting.

 

One point is the literary device "evening/morning" used to describe the other six days of creation is not used for day seven.

 

There are also several passages that imply the seventh day is ongoing...

 

Hebrews 4:

 

Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it. For we also have had the good news proclaimed to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because they did not share the faith of those who obeyed. Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,“So I declared on oath in my anger, ‘They shall never enter my rest.’”And yet his works have been finished since the creation of the world. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “On the seventh day God rested from all his works.”And again in the passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.” Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest, and since those who formerly had the good news proclaimed to them did not go in because of their disobedience, God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.” For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience. For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

 

 

This is completely different than what is generally taught in the churches and this makes complete sense. What is typically taught sounds ok, you know, but until now there was a feeling of confusion, meaning it just didn't sit well.

 

Praise God! In thinking about this further (I really hope I communicate this right) there rarely is that feeling of 'rest'. This is not to say there is no peace, but I understand what the Lord says about this rest thing, knowing there is rest and due to what the churches generally teach here, there's always been this feeling that I am always out of Gods will strictly based on this. Seriously, how can one truly rest when we are in this world. Yes, there is understanding that we are not of this world, although we are still in these earthly bodies.

 

Anyway, bottom line, I got it:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
The account of Jesus' life on earth is, to me, the most far-fetched story in the bible. What he claimed to be, what he did, and what happened to him are so difficult to grasp. Like the idea that the creator of the whole universe was somehow contained in a human (even a little baby); the fact that miraculous healings were taking place; people walking on water; and of course, the resurrection.

 

If I can believe that those things literally took place (and that belief is central to the Christian faith), why couldn't I believe in other seemingly outlandish things?

 

Not that I'm committed either way. There many great arguments for non-literal interpretations of some things in the bible (as TFW has wonderfully shared <<< LIKE :p).

 

 

You bring up some excellent points, I never thought of it this way. The non literal books/verses seem to grab our attention, don't they! God does have a sense of humor...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
It's possible that God, himself, was the light source before the sun and stars were created. This very thing will take place when God returns to live with us again, as prophecied in Revelation. It basically says God, himself, will be our literal light source.

 

This is what I've always assumed. If you look at the credible accounts of those who have 'died' and were revived (by God) they all speak of a 'light'.

 

 

One reason I am very cautious to abandon the literal 24 hour interpretation is because, for each day, it makes a specific point to repeat that there was evening and there was morning.

 

Agreed, this is why I've always felt it to be literal.

 

 

FYI, I am a Gap Theorist. I don't believe the "6 days" refer to creation but rather to the remaking of earth. An unspecified period of time, I believe, existed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. I also believe races of beings existed on earth before Adam, including the angelic race.

 

This is really fascinating, I've never heard of the gap theory. There's always been this feeling that the scientific community is correct concerning their estimation of how old certain things are.

 

M30, just out of curiosity, what is your take on the dinosaurs. Do you think they could have been a part of what you speak of concerning re-creation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually think many of the OT stories were originally written as allegories. The creation story, in particular, seems very clearly to be an allegory in my mind. The literature from those time periods is scant, but there's no reason not to believe that writers (storytellers) weren't sophisticated enough to use allegory, metaphor, ect.

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rydo, I meant to add that I don't know what you mean by 'peer reviewed'.

 

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I do suppose you could take the whole story as an allegory. That is how I would believe it if I had to and I cared; but if it was allegorical then what's the point? Anyone could interpret it however they wanted and nobody could interject. Thus, even this discussion would be pointless because everyone's interpretation would be valid. Just make it say whatever you want it to.

 

Does that make sense or am I insane?

 

No, you're not insane, but you can interpret facts in any way too. With an allegory, the author usually makes is pretty obvious which direction the interpretation is going, but it's always open to a different interpretation. It becomes a question of: what was the author's original message in the story, and is that the only message allowable? We all read things differently, so are there different versions of the story just based on that simple fact? Do different versions of the story exist simply because we are thinking of them? If so, who gets to decide the official version and why?

 

The creation story seems like an allegory in simple ways. You can see symbolism everywhere, but the story is meant to be an important lesson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...