[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 197 KB, 593x584, chad_fren.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19815704 No.19815704[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>Of course I take the Bible literally. How else are you supposed to read it?

>> No.19815739

Matthew 5:13
>Ye are the salt of the earth. But if the salt lose its savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is good for nothing any more but to be cast out, and to be trodden on by men.

You can't have an opinion; you're just salt that doesn't taste good and should be thrown out and stepped on.

>> No.19815808

>>19815739
How can salt lose its savor?

>> No.19816217

ok

>> No.19816513

>>19815704
Guys... I think this guy may have sewn his wife to himself. She's been missing for three weeks. This is the fifth person missing thanks to people taking Genesis 2:24 literally...

>> No.19816527

>>19816513
Literally doesn't always mean materially

>> No.19816730

>>19815704
John 3:3-10
>Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.[a]”

>“How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”

>Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[b] gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[c] must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”[d]

>“How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.

>“You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things?

>> No.19816852

>>19816527
>Literally
>adverb
>in a literal manner or sense; exactly.
>Opposite
loosely
imprecisely
metaphorically
>Similar
verbatim
word for word
line for line
letter for letter
to the letter
Now if I say something indirectly, what might that be called?
>met·a·phor
>/ˈmedəˌfôr,ˈmedəˌfər/
>noun
> a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
> a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
Uh oh. Wasn't that word an antonym to "literally," and isn't that word exactly what Genesis 2:24 is doing..? Guys help it's my first time practicing hermeneutics what do.

>> No.19816889

>>19816852
You can take something mathematically, ontologically, ethically, chemically, biologically etc so long as its valid w the linguistic construction.

>> No.19816926

>>19816889
My point is that not everything in the Bible is literal. We're talking more than a thousand years of writing, realistically more than fifteen hundred years, of different styles, eras, authors, audiences, and cultures. The notion that it'd be readily readable to an American more than three thousand years later is laughable. It's more complex than that. A lot of the fundamentalist boomers I run into have this issue of assuming the Bible is written to Americans.

>> No.19816945

>>19816926
I don't disagree w that. I think being able to trace its meaning is beneficial.

>> No.19816955

>>19815739
I haven't lost my flavour!

>> No.19816957

>>19815808
If salt isn't salty it's worthless. The saltiness of salt is its savour

>> No.19816979

>>19816945
Ok, then we are not in disagreement. My issue in the OP is the fixation on literal. Inflexibility in interpretation, I find, leads to dogma.

>> No.19817037

>>19815739
You can read a book literally and still accept that the people on the book can still use figurative language in dialogue

>> No.19817057

>>19817037
it's just a bit of a joke, and also a reference to the Scopes Monkey Trial.
>Darrow: You claim that everything in the Bible should be literally interpreted?
>Bryan: I believe everything in the Bible should be accepted as it is given there: some of the Bible is given illustratively. For instance: "Ye are the salt of the earth." I would not insist that man was actually salt, or that he had flesh of salt, but it is used in the sense of salt as saving God's people.

>> No.19817245

Using an established idiom or context evident metaphor isn’t the same as saying something is metaphorical without basis. The point of parables and metaphors in the Bible and Quran is to explain something more clearly, not make it more subjective and confusing