Bob Thune 2004-03-28
From Summa Bergania
From : David Bergan
Sent : Sunday, March 28, 2004 5:44 PM
To : Bob Thune, Jr
Subject : Literal vs Allegorical
Hi Pastor Bob,
- In response to your first disagreement, can't you and I just agree to use common sense when we read Scripture? Your examples press the limits of credulity. Of course Jesus didn't have chlorophyll running through his veins... when any halfway reasonable person reads the parables, he recognizes them as parables and interprets them in a way that honors the genre. Let's agree that we'll do the same. (I prefer the term "plain meaning" to the term "literal interpretation." In other words, we're not looking to take everything literally... we're looking for the plain meaning of the text, the meaning which the author/speaker intended. Which means we recognize that illustrations are illustrations and word-pictures are word-pictures and the seven-headed dragon in Revelation is probably a metaphor for something besides a seven-headed dragon.)
Sorry that I didn't make my point clearer. I wasn't trying to say that the parables and metaphors of Jesus should be taken literally. What I meant was that since we take Jesus's parables allegorically, then can't we also take the stories of Job, Adam and Eve, the Tower of Babel, and Noah metaphorically, too? (And taking things metaphorically doesn't detract from their God-breathedness.) Noah is likely to be closest to historical since there are other Mid-East legends of a flood, but it isn't likely that the flood was world-wide... just local. But if the flood was world-wide, how did Noah get kangaroos on the ark from Australia and how did they get back to Australia after he let them go at Mount Ararat?
- And no, I do not agree that inspiration is a "thing of degrees." The distinctions you are trying to make are totally arbitrary. If you want, I can amass for you all the times that Jesus and the NT writers refer to some historical event and treat it as utterly reliable and truthful. The history is not "less inspired" than the prophecy. Moreover, you must remember that when a first-century Jew spoke of "the Prophets" or "prophecy" (as in 2 Peter 1:20-21), he had in mind the whole category of the OT called "The Prophets" - everything from Isaiah through Malachi. He would not separate out the "prophetic" parts of Isaiah from the "historical" parts. The Jews knew no such distinction. And, by the way, they considered Moses to be the greatest prophet of all, which means that the Pentateuch falls into the category of "prophecy." So if you buy Peter's claim that "prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit," then the only parts of the OT still in question for you would be the Wisdom books and Samuel/Kings/Chronicles.
So then you hold that the self-righteous author of Psalm 26 is just as inspired as Jesus is in Luke 18:11 when He rebukes that exact same attitude? The red words in my Bible aren't any more important that the rest? And Moses's status as the "greatest prophet" (as you say) doesn't make him any more inspired than the "minor prophets" (as my Bible calls them) like Amos?
- PS - The Osama argument is easily solvable, also. Just ask around and you'll find a multitude of Muslims who would disagree with Osama's claim to "divine inspiration." Those within his own religion would disagree with him. But in the history of the Christian church, the divine expiration of Scripture - and therefore its reliability - have always been agreed upon across wide spectrums of tradition.
On the contrary, Christianity has not been so unanimous. As I pointed out earlier, St. Jerome, Origen, and CS Lewis all don't accept the inerrancy claim. Moreoever, with respect to specific books there was great controversy such as 2 Peter, the Book of Enoch, Revelations, the Epistle of Barnabas, etc. But "a multitude of Muslims" or Christians thinking one way really shouldn't affect the truth of the issue. I bet the great majority of the early Christians (including Peter and Paul) thought that the earth was the center of the universe.
- You read me right: "Anything that claims the authenticity hologram automatically has it, unless we can bring enough evidence against it to make a reasonable doubt." Which is exactly the same thing Microsoft would have to do in court to prove piracy.
That is because when people's lives/property is on the line we assume that they are innocent until proven guilty. But in geometry you don't accept any theorem written until it is proven from other theorems/postulates. You build truth from existing truth. You don't just make a statement and assume it true until someone else refutes you. We didn't assume (except when jesting) that the moon is made green cheese until the Apollo mission proved them wrong. We made guesses, but staked nothing as certain until we had evidence.
As always, looking forward to your responses.
Your friend,
David
--David Bergan
"I wish I had never been born," she said. "What are we born for?"
"For infinite happiness," said the Spirit. "You can step out into it at any moment..."
-CS Lewis (The Great Divorce)
