by jimwalton » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:52 pm
Bible believers are often accused of attributing difficult texts to "metaphor," but that's a vast understatement and a reductionistic perspective about the Bible. The Bible is a rich and deep literary collection containing music, poetry, metaphor, allegory, archetypes, parable, hyperbole, metonymy, irony, simile, and many other literary forms, as well as genres such as prayer, prophecy, blessing, covenant language, legal language, etc. "Literally" quickly becomes a word with very little meaning or helpfulness. If a poet says the trees of the field will clap their hands and the mountains will jump for joy, is that literal? Of course not, it's poetry. If a man prays, "God, kill all those people", we may all understand that his prayer is inappropriate, and is not blessed by God, but is it literal? Well, how does that word even apply? And how does it apply to archetype, allegory, parable, and all the others? It's a word that should be dropped from the discussion because it doesn't take us anywhere except to the Land of Misunderstanding. The Bible is far more well-written than just the two choices of either literal or metaphorical. But let me approach your questions.
1. I think Genesis 1-2 are an account of functional creation, not of material creation. I take them literally to be about the roles and functions the different aspects of creation filled, and how God ordered the universe to function. It is not a conflict with modern science. This is a much larger conversation.
2. Women and authority, and 1 Tim. 2.12. The teaching of 1 Timothy is limited to that place (Ephesus), and it is not a general teaching. It's obvious in 1 Corinthians 11 that Paul allows women to speak, so he never meant 1 Tim. 2 to apply to everyone everywhere. This is a much larger conversation.
3. The alleged "genocide" of the Amalekites is a dreadful misunderstanding of ancient cultures. Archaeologists have uncovered information that helps us understand that the "kill them all" rhetoric of the ancient world was exactly that: warfare rhetoric, and was not carried out literally. It's the way they spoke, but not the way they acted. This is a much larger conversation.
4. Yes, homosexuality is wrong. This is a much larger conversation.
5. Slavery is not an acceptable practice, and the Bible never commands or endorses it. Slavery in the ancient world was a different entity than the way we understand it, and Peter was telling people how to be godly, not endorsing social structures. This is a much larger conversation.
6. You misunderstand the "sacrifice of Isaac." The text makes it quite clear that human sacrifice is not at all what's going on.
7. Virgin birth? Yep. They had no reason to make it up because it only hurts their case.
8. Serpent spoke to Eve? Nah. The Hebrew word for serpent is nahash, which is indeed the common word for snake, but it also possibly means "able to stand upright." There are all kinds of verbal possibilities here. For instance, nahash is the same root as nehoset, which means "bronze." So the shiny, upright snake in Number 21.9 is the same root: it was a literal thing, but a spiritual symbol. "Snake" could also be a word play, because the Hebrew word for "deceive" is very close to it, and is the same root as for magic and divination. Snakes in the ancient world were very much associated with spiritual powers, magic, and cultic rituals. So what if this "thing" (the nhs) was a spiritual power, represented to the woman as a bright creature, speaking "spiritual wisdom", and yet was deceiving her—the word for snake? Just a little bit of research changes the whole picture.
These all call for much more conversation than space allows when you ask 8 deep questions. I've answered very briefly and inadequately, but you set me up for that. If you want to talk about any of them further, let me know.
Last bumped by Anonymous on Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:52 pm.