Re: EXODUS FICTION



 Religions > Atheism > Re: EXODUS FICTION

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Penndragon penndragonATtpg.com.au"
Date: 02 Apr 2004 08:08:18 PM
Object: Re: EXODUS FICTION
MM William
Well. I would say they are not literally true. However they are
allegorically true. Eg. when we have Moses complaining to God that his
brother is quick witted whilest he himself is much slower to come to the
truth God rebukes him in a teaching meant to impart to us that comming to
answers quickly isn't neccessarilly going to mean the best answer will be
arrived at. A very simple allegory that is missed (or I could say
allegorically "mist"). THey also miss the symbolism of the serpent (rod or
staff) in this same allegory as being a measure of Gnosis.
I do see PL's point in asking as he did as well. When the teaching is meant
to be allegorical, does it matter that certain physical events may appear to
mirror it on a literal level?
MP
Penn
"William" <telige@mail.clara.fl.com> wrote in message
news:406afa55.1477179@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 23:50:16 GMT, Matt Silberstein <matts2nopam@ix
netcom.nospamcom> wrote:

telige@mail.clara.fl.com (William):

Matt Silberstein <matts2nopam@ixnetcom.nospamcom> wrote:

telige@mail.clara.fl.com (William):


Your "questions for Christians" are only applicable to that noisy
minority of Christians who are biblical literalists. Educated
Christians take these narratives seriously, but not literally,

viewing

them as teaching devices, parables, metaphors, and allegories.


If they are not literally true then they can be mean whatever you
like. That's the beauty of fiction - it doesn't have to relate to
reality.


Nonsense. Words do not fit into just one of two boxes,
descriptions of actual events and fiction. Is the Declaration of
Independence either literally true or fiction?


Is it literally true that Thomas Jefferson Drafted the Declaration of
Independence in June 1776?


Sorry, but I fail to see the relevance to your comment. I did not
claim that there were no "literally" true statements. Showing
that one literally true statement exists does not mean that all
statements are either literally true or fiction. Now how about
answering my question: is the Declaration of Independence
literally true?


I'm tempted to see this as a silly diversion and ignore it. But I'll
give you the benefit of the doubt.

I came into this thread on the question of whether the Israelite's
exodus from Egypt and other stories, as described in the bible, are
literally true or whether they are fiction. And, depending on which is
the case, what they do or do not tell us. That is the relevance of my
comment and you do yourself an injustice by failing to see it.

There are propositions which describe events and these are either
literally true (ie they describe real events that happen in the real
world) or they are not literally true (ie they describe fictional
events). And there are other propositions which do not describe
events at all (eg, abstracts, directives) but which hang on those
events. Most people know the difference.

The statement "Thomas Jefferson Drafted the Declaration of
Independence in June 1776" is a description of an event in the real
world and is either literally true or is not.

The Declaration of Independence itself also describes events in the
real world (eg that all Men are created equal) which are either
literally true or not. But it also contains abstracts and directives
that do not describe events so the question of literal truth in that
context does not arise and it is silly to imply that it does.
You might as well ask whether the ten commandments are 'literally
true' but that would be just as silly. The question is whether it is
literally true that God spoke to Moses on Mount Sinia and delivered
the commandments (his literal words) to him.

Now that you have taken up this question, will you tell me whether the
biblical account of the Israelites leaving Egypt is literally true or
not. And whether it is literally true that God spoke to Moses on Mount
Sinai and delivered the commandments to him.

And, if you have time, whether the statement "Thomas Jefferson Drafted
the Declaration of Independence in June 1776" is literally true.

William

.

User: "William"

Title: Re: EXODUS FICTION 03 Apr 2004 03:34:59 AM
On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 12:08:18 +1000, "Penndragon"
<penndragonATtpg.com.au> wrote:

Well. I would say they are not literally true. However they are
allegorically true. Eg. when we have Moses complaining to God that his
brother is quick witted whilest he himself is much slower to come to the
truth God rebukes him in a teaching meant to impart to us that comming to
answers quickly isn't neccessarilly going to mean the best answer will be
arrived at. A very simple allegory that is missed (or I could say
allegorically "mist").

Firstly, I have just read the bit you refer to and don't see anything
allegorical in it. Please paste in the allegorical bit. It seems to me
to be straight forward that God chose Moses to do the work and Moses
tried to get out of it by saying he was slow of speech. God was angry
that he didn't trust him but let him have Aaron his brother to do the
speaking.
Secondly, you appear to be missing the same point that both other
posters have missed. No-one is saying that the characters in the
biblical account might use terms that are not to be taken literally.
That is not the point. The point is whether the account itself is to
be taken literally.
This question seems to come up a lot and the response follows a
familiar pattern. Someone brings up a biblical passage which
Christians find embarrassing. Christians (and others) jump in and
point out that not all language is to be taken literally and then jump
out as if that is the end of the matter. It's nowhere as simple as
that.

THey also miss the symbolism of the serpent (rod or
staff) in this same allegory as being a measure of Gnosis.

I have just covered this point in a response to PL. There are two
different and distinct issues here. The first is whether the account
of an event is to be taken as literally true and the second is whether
the event can also be taken as an illustration for some other point,
whether or not the event actually happened. And, of course, there is a
third issue and that is whether to take literally what the characters
in the account are saying ie, their words are quoted literally but is
what they are saying to be taken literally.
For the bible to have relevance it is crucially important to know
whether the writers are using myths, allegories, made up stories (eg,
the exodus) to illustrate a point or whether these accounts are
describing events that actually happened in time. If the accounts are
not literally true but are simply used to illustrate a point then what
is there to show that the point they are illustrating is literally
true? Presumably, from the biblical perspective, the 'point' has to
be taken as an un-supported revealed Truth which is simply understood
better by inventing a story to illustrate it. If that's the case then
the whole thing begins to collapse. Crucial teaching in the bible
relies on far too many of the events described in both the OT and the
NT as having happened factually.
William
.


  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER