everything we read or see we interprete, we are subjective creatures, it is not somthing you can get away from. but symbolic and meatphysical inturpratations are based on very loosly placed evidence. i propose that a more litral approach will rule out a lot of the mystical nonsence, and get down to some actual events, and evidence you can see, such as words and meanings. they wrote what they meant is the basic assumption of litrality, and for my evidence i use hebrew texts, and see what i can come up with that may match it in english. i know its going to have a lot of translation issues, such as the ones you mentioned, thats why you also study the culture, see where these words are used, and in what context, and see if there are any other meanings for the worlds on a social level that does not appear in the dictionarys. of course translation is going to be dodgy. i am not claiming to have THE TRUTH, just say that a lot of things that the major christian religions attribute to the bible are simply not there, no matter what language you want to translate it into.Originally posted by radagast
To say you haven't interpreted the bible is absurd - literal, symbolic, or metaphorical, they are all interpretations.
You glossed right past the basic point I made - that thousands of biblical scholars seem to disagree with you.
democracy is not a concept truth understands. just becuase thousands of people have said it diffrently, does not make me any more right or wrong. infact, if they are wrong, it proberly gives me more of a chance to be right, as i can learn from their mistakes.
i agree. thats why you have to be careful and know what you are doing with translation. noone said it wasent a tricky busness. my claim is that the religious institutions, knowing how tricky a thing it can be, have used it as an excuse to put their own doctrines within the 'translated' books, so people see it in the bible. it is from these interpratations that nearly all the misconceptions that i have raised come from. and the fact that people just take what a priest says as truth without questioning.I have little doubt you can find 'a' meaning in ancient Hebrew, which contradicts the current interpretations of the bible. Not being a biblical scholar, nor a scholar of ancient Hebrew or Aramaic, I cannot address your translations. I have had enough experience with language to know that many, many words have multiple shades of meaning, many with completely different definitions housed in the same word. The interpretation of the word aikido (a compound word) from Japanese could mean the spiritual path of harmony, or doorway to balanced strength. The word hara could mean belly, the seat of the soul, or strength of will. In English, to say a person 'has Heart' isn't trying to convey he has a blood pumping organ. Obviously, the interpretations of these are quite different, with potentially dramatic differences in meaning and intent. That Hell (ancient hebrew) could mean both in the ground or in a really bad place, I would see as not only possble, but likely, given the consistency of biblical translations over the past 700 years. Translations require both an understanding of the meanings of the words and a good understanding of the cultures from which the writings arose.
i will reply to all your posts as i can. i am sorry my reponse time is so jaggard.