Timeline for Is it honest to accept only part of a story as being metaphorical?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2016 at 9:24 | comment | added | Bakuriu | AFAIK the Genesis contains significant contradictions in its creation process and this was well known to the Jews since thousands of years ago... I would add to the answer that Biblical hermeneutics is not something "new" but is a discipline started literally thousands of years ago, and in the case of the genesis it's interpretation as a metaphore is older than Christianity itself. | |
| Jun 15, 2016 at 6:37 | vote | accept | Fatalize | ||
| Jun 14, 2016 at 20:36 | comment | added | IsThatTrue | ...can be analysed in most critical way possible. Other options question author and bring in several other factors in play like acceptability during time of author etc. In my opinion that seems to very particular and cannot be deduced just from texts. It also does not seem that inclusion or exclusion of those points change my answer's content in any significant way. | |
| Jun 14, 2016 at 20:29 | comment | added | IsThatTrue | While I think most of 5 is similar to my 1, I understand your criticism. But I was writing the answer from the assumption that author is not compromising with text in any way and is free to write what he wants. Your observation in 6. is good but that can be said to be just a "wild-goose chase" as anything then can be said to be a result of fear. As the question was not about what individual sects believe but whether it was dishonest to accept such metaphors, I began from assumption that author wrote with the most accuracy that was possible so that the decision to part away from such writing... | |
| Jun 14, 2016 at 20:09 | comment | added | user9166 | There are two definite additional uses of metaphor, which are more important here than any of your 4. -- 5. When what is being expressed transcends clear expression and can only be captured by allusion or 6. In 'roman a clef', when what is being expressed is dangerous to say clearly and must be expressed through forms that usually mean something else. Kabbalah takes much of the Bible as a case of 5. Gnosticism takes much of it as a case of 6. The qualities of the resulting metaphors are different from the ones you enumerate for your cases. So this construction is just misleading. | |
| Jun 14, 2016 at 20:03 | history | edited | IsThatTrue | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed some grammatical errors, improved language
|
| Jun 14, 2016 at 19:14 | history | edited | IsThatTrue | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added resources and improved language
|
| Jun 14, 2016 at 19:10 | comment | added | IsThatTrue | Isn't that true though? I mean, a large number of people do not believe in creation account as outlined in Genesis and still identify as Christians. Even YEC organisations like CMI accept that it is not necessary to believe that creation account is literal to be a Christian. I wasn't stating my opinion, just arguing from perspective of people who believe Genesis account is not literal. However, I would edit my answer to make it clear that I am not stating my opinion there;) | |
| Jun 14, 2016 at 18:25 | comment | added | IsThatTrue | I apologise if I gave that impression but I never implied that in my answer. | |
| Jun 14, 2016 at 16:40 | history | answered | IsThatTrue | CC BY-SA 3.0 |