Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
Yup. Everyman left him alone. I didn't notice anywone coming to his rescue. In hindsight Praise God for that.
Does this mean every? Is this two birds with one stone or what? LOL.
Colossians 4:6 Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.
In all 3 situations the word "every" meant every. I'm 3 for 3 now. Every means every. Maybe its time you suggest to me what "every" means.
How to Study the Old TestamentIf we are to respond to the Old Testament, we must know how to interpret it so we know how to respond. Much of the spiritual truth of the Old Testament is evident even through a superficial reading of the text. In-depth study can yield even greater results but is accompanied by greater difficulties as well. Various principles and methodologies that serve as guides for exegesis and interpretation can only be introduced here but may provide an introduction for the student.
One of the main principles of biblical interpretation has already been mentioned: The Bible must be allowed to speak for itself. This is difficult to attain because every interpreter has presuppositions, that is, preformed ideas about what the Bible is, what it says, and how it fits together. These assumptions can shape the interpretation of the text and can slant or distort the interpretation. Presuppositions are often subconscious. When they are not subconscious, they are sometimes considered nonnegotiable. Proper interpretation does not require readers to throw away all presuppositions, but it does insist that readers recognize the presuppositions they hold, constantly reevaluate them for validity, and subordinate them to the text of Scripture.
The object of this principle is to prevent interpreters from manipulating the text to suit their own agendas. If the text is to speak with authority, it must enjoy a certain amount of autonomy from the interpreter.
In literary circles today there continues to be much discussion about the focus of the interpreter’s attention. Traditionally the author and his background and intention (either explicit or inferred) had served as the key to interpretation. More recently literary critics have concluded that the impossibility of achieving any confident identification of what the author intended demands that meaning is the result of the impact of the text (an entity isolated from and independent of its author) on the individual reader. As we have said, however, if the Bible is to be considered uniquely authoritative, it cannot always be treated as just another piece of literature. If the biblical text is accepted as authoritative, the intention of the author (human and divine) must remain the focus of the interpreter’s attention. One result of this commitment is that the interpreter should not be searching for hidden meanings or mystical symbolism. Another is that the author’s message ought not to be ignored or neglected in favor of how the interpreter wants to use the text (a common practice in Bible study groups and sermons).
But how do we try to determine the intention of the author? First, the genre of the literature must be determined. In our contemporary literature, biography will be read differently from mystery, and drama differently from limerick. The type of literature affects how that writing will be approached and interpreted. This applies equally to the Old Testament. Prophecy is a different genre from proverbial literature. To begin with, then, the interpreter must identify the genre of what he or she is trying to interpret and discover as much as possible about that genre. This latter endeavor is approached through a wide variety of critical methodologies (see appendix to this book [forget it, I’m not typing all of that, buy the book ;^)-ksen]).
Second, it is important to discover all we can about the audience for whom the writing was intended and the circumstances under which it was written. These facts may affect the way certain statements are to be understood.
Third, through an examination of the context, we should try to identify the purpose of the author or editor. This purpose may be addressed explicitly, or it may need to be deduced from observations concerning the author’s selection and arrangement of the material.
As interpreters, if we can understand the author, the audience, the situation, and the literary genre as well as possible, we are in a good position to put ourselves in the audience and understand the words and, more important, the message of the section that is being interpreted. Interpretation requires us to become, to the best of our abilities, part of the original audience. The message to them is the same as the message to us.
Thoughts?
-ksen
Presuppositions are often subconscious. When they are not subconscious, they are sometimes considered nonnegotiable. Proper interpretation does not require readers to throw away all presuppositions, but it does insist that readers recognize the presuppositions they hold, constantly reevaluate them for validity, and subordinate them to the text of Scripture.
This is as watery as that NFL rule. What if I constantly reevaluate my presuppositions, and somehow my presuppositions always win?
But how do we try to determine the intention of the author? First, the genre of the literature must be determined. In our contemporary literature, biography will be read differently from mystery, and drama differently from limerick. The type of literature affects how that writing will be approached and interpreted. This applies equally to the Old Testament. Prophecy is a different genre from proverbial literature. To begin with, then, the interpreter must identify the genre of what he or she is trying to interpret and discover as much as possible about that genre. This latter endeavor is approached through a wide variety of critical methodologies
Well, yeah, OK. But what we often argue about is exactly this: what is history, what is allegory, what is literal, what is metaphorical? Any set of "rules" or "critical methodologies" will be pre-tailored to the presuppositions of the reader.
I follow a "methodology" which gives me a literal reading of John 6, a Non Catholic will have a methodiology which allows a few verses at the end to negate the rest. So what? The end result is the same, and some tradition about how we read the Bible must prevail.
No matter how much you dress it up.
SD
He is not speaking here of every man on the face of the earth, he was referring to those at that time, his disciples, not we. By your interpretation comparing it to the every eye phrase it would mean every man on the earth at the time which was not the case.
If you want to discuss this fine. If not fine.
This verse says every man and in light of your statement above I was wondering if you thought it included a cultist like me or just every man you find convenient?
Colossians 4:6 Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.
Maybe its time you suggest to me what "every" means.
Words have meaning only in their context and that is the great challenge of rightly dividing, with two or three witnesses let all things be established, and he wasn't talking about court. "Every" does not always mean every and one must be able to prove its context. Make sense?
Then guess you will always remain in the RCC. Now if you start to “subordinate them to the text of Scripture” then we can probably make a good Baptist out of you. ;^)
Well, yeah, OK. But what we often argue about is exactly this: what is history, what is allegory, what is literal, what is metaphorical? Any set of "rules" or "critical methodologies" will be pre-tailored to the presuppositions of the reader.
I don’t necessarily agree. If you were to look at Scripture in context you can probably tell what sort of writing you are looking at. There is obviously a difference in the writing styles of Song of Solomon and I Kings.
I follow a "methodology" which gives me a literal reading of John 6, a Non Catholic will have a methodiology which allows a few verses at the end to negate the rest. So what? The end result is the same, and some tradition about how we read the Bible must prevail.
The difference is that if I come across a tradition that is clearly not Scriptural than it would not cause me any heartache to toss it. Can you say the same? (I know, I know, there are no RCC traditions that are not Scriptural)
-ksen
That is what the author is saying when he exhorts us to subordinate our presuppositions to the text of Scripture. His case is that the Bible has God for an author and therefore it is not just a literary work, it is the very word of God.
Thanks for your thoughts.
-ksen
I don’t necessarily agree. If you were to look at Scripture in context you can probably tell what sort of writing you are looking at. There is obviously a difference in the writing styles of Song of Solomon and I Kings.
The obvious ones are, well, obvious. But take the first few chapters of Genesis. It isn't obvious to me that this is a literal history, but it is to many folks. And that's where the quarrrels lie.
SD
The rule leaves it up to the official to decide if the ball is tucked or only being tucked. It is still a judgment of the official, a bad one in this case.
But, as I said, that didn't lose the game for Oakland. They got pushed down the field twice and lost. They have an excuse about why they should have won, but they don't have one for being dominated when the game was on the line.
I look forward to the game this week and welcome your support afterward, should the worst happen to the Pats. I can't see myself rooting for St Louis or Philly to win it all, so the Pats would have my support, if need be.
SD
Angelo wants you to bribe him, not the other way around. Like offer him some clam chowdah if he roots for the Pats.
SD
Is clam chowdah koshah?
-ksen
(A NH native)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.