|
|
|
|
tergiversant
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
 Posted - 08/30/2001 : 10:24:16
|
Tokyodreamer,
quote:
The consequence that God gave for eating the fruit was that "ye shall surely die". Apparently, Eve didn't trust God fully (hey, she didn't know this was wrong yet!), so she ate it anyway.
Well, they didn't die after all. Hmm... The serpent was telling the truth, while God apparently lied.
(Oh, you think it wasn't literal death God was talking about, but the figurative death of being kicked out of the Garden of Eden, and separated from God. I think that's way too much of a stretch in the context of the story. Everything else is plain talk, and Adam and Eve hadn't eaten of either tree, so was God trying to trick them or something? They were too naive to catch that fancy literary crap!)
Adam and Eve too naïve? I seriously doubt it. The characters were created in the author's image, and the ancient Jews were anything but strictly literal in their interpretations of their oral and written traditions. The post-enlightenment rationalism of our age has stripped away our sense of allegory so much that we are apt to often read the Bible in a manner totally foreign to that intended by the authors. We should dispense with this literalistic silliness of treating "Man," "Woman," and the "serpent" as literal historical figures and start treating this tale as it was intended, as a creation allegory explaining how the world came about and why it is not paradisiacal today. The most ancient and orthodox Jewish and Christian traditions have never stopped doing so. Only the intellectual descendants of Luther, Calvin and their lot have lost sight of the spiritual meanings hidden in these texts.
Edited by - tergiversant on 08/31/2001 07:51:32
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 08/30/2001 : 14:20:43 [Permalink]
|
I'm scratching my head here, wondering what it is you think my meaning in that particular discussion was. Surely you don't think I believe the story of Genesis is true in any respect?
I think the book of Genesis is a complete myth, apparently filled with allegory that reflects the people who wrote it, and who it was written for. I certainly am not arguing that the myth should be taken literally. The criticism that I was trying to get across (poorly, apparently) is in Bible Literalists who choose, at their own most opportune time, to call something either a literal truth, or an allegorical tool representing whatever it is that they are apologizing for.
My question about the meaning of "day" in Genesis stands though. In the context of the story, is there any reason to assume that the term "day" means anything other than a 24 hour period? For example, are there any other terms for periods of time that are used in leiu of their actual meaning in today's usage? Just because a myth is allegorical, does that make any and all terms free game for interpretation, so that it fit's one's own desired meaning?
You've said nothing here or in the original thread that I disagree with, to put it simply. 
------------
Hope springs eternal but there's no conviction
Actions mistaken for lip service paid
All this concern is the true contradiction
The world is insane...
Edited by - tokyodreamer on 08/30/2001 14:22:44 |
 |
|
|
tergiversant
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2001 : 13:00:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
My question about the meaning of "day" in Genesis stands though. In the context of the story, is there any reason to assume that the term "day" means anything other than a 24 hour period? For example, are there any other terms for periods of time that are used in leiu of their actual meaning in today's usage? Just because a myth is allegorical, does that make any and all terms free game for interpretation, so that it fit's one's own desired meaning?
There are various reasons to think that "yom" did not refer to a literal 24-hours day, not the least of which is that the ancient Jews and Christian theologians did not treat it that way.
I fail to see "meaning in today's usage" is quite relevant, since we are dealing with ancient Hebrew language. They certainly used "yom" to mean "age" or "eon" on occasion.
"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2001 : 13:10:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
There are various reasons to think that "yom" did not refer to a literal 24-hours day, not the least of which is that the ancient Jews and Christian theologians did not treat it that way.
Cool. Learn somethin' new every day! 
quote:
I fail to see "meaning in today's usage" is quite relevant, since we are dealing with ancient Hebrew language. They certainly used "yom" to mean "age" or "eon" on occasion.
Ah, I think we are on different wavelengths here. I was arguing from a Biblical Literalist's perspective. I was trying to call them on their own claim, that Genesis is a literal story of the beginning of the universe. "Fine, you want literal, I'll give you literal!"
Anyway, I'm sure I'm just digging myself in deeper into incomprehension (due to my poor ability to put my ideas into words on most occasions!  ) What's the saying? "The error is between the chair and the keyboard"? 
------------
Hope springs eternal but there's no conviction
Actions mistaken for lip service paid
All this concern is the true contradiction
The world is insane... |
|
|
|
tergiversant
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2001 : 13:20:41 [Permalink]
|
I think we are pretty much on the same page here. What I'm really wondering is whether our ethical objections to the whole garden entrapment setup still hold when we shift our interpretation to a more traditional, midrashic, allegorical framework. Whaddya think?
"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
