Inference and Assumption

[nPeace]

@sojourner I have wondered though about the honesty of people who seem to use the absence of evidence argument - physical evidence that is, regarding the Biblical account, yet they accept the word of historians, where no physical evidence is found.

Is it correct to say no physical evidence is found?
For example, is a tablet physical evidence? A cuneiform tablet... A manuscript stele... A scroll... Several scrolls...

 

[ElishaElijah]

Yes, and part of the hermeneutic we use is precisely as I stated: first we exegete, then an interpretation is formulated. That’s the definition of laws whereby the meaning of the scriptures is to be ascertained. The “hermeneutic” you suggest in your posts blurs that definition.

Actually you’re confusing the meaning and purpose.

 

[sojourner]

@sojourner I have wondered though about the honesty of people who seem to use the absence of evidence argument - physical evidence that is, regarding the Biblical account, yet they accept the word of historians, where no physical evidence is found.

Is it correct to say no physical evidence is found?
For example, is a tablet physical evidence? A cuneiform tablet... A manuscript stele... A scroll... Several scrolls...

If no physical evidence exists to support the existence of an alleged historic event, then the event can’t be said to be historic. for example, there’s no credible evidence to support the resurrection. Therefore, it can’t be said to be a historic event. That might rub you the wrong way, but there it is.

 

[sojourner]

Actually you’re confusing the meaning and purpose.

Whatever makes you comfortable...

 

[nPeace]

One more thing: Why would I be interested in reading a bachelor’s thesis when I’ve read several post-doctoral works on the subject?

bachelor's thesis? Scholars are bachelors to others scholars, I'm sure. I'm sure regardless of how you may feel about yourself, other scholars view you as a bachelor.

 

[nPeace]

If no physical evidence exists to support the existence of an alleged historic event, then the event can’t be said to be historic. for example, there’s no credible evidence to support the resurrection. Therefore, it can’t be said to be a historic event. That might rub you the wrong way, but there it is.

Do you accept writings on tablets? Is that physical evidence?

 

[ElishaElijah]

You’re talking about two different processes: the process of exegesis, and the process of interpretation. Interpretation rises out of exegesis. Why? Because exegesis strips away the filters through which we read and offers an unbiased reading of what the text actually says. Once we know what the text actually says, we can derive an interpretation of that reading. One does not involve any spiritual influence. The other may.

ex•e•ge•sis ĕk″sə-jē′sĭs
►

• n.
  Critical explanation or analysis, especially of a text.
• n.
  The exposition or interpretation of any literary production or passage; more particularly, the exposition or interpretation of Scripture. See exegetical theology, under exegetical.
• n.
  A discourse intended to explain or illustrate a subject; specifically, an exercise in Biblical interpretation sometimes prescribed to students of theology when on examination preliminary to licensure or ordination.
  
  Sorry but you aren’t making any sense, not sure where you’re teaching or getting your degree.

 

[sojourner]

bachelor's thesis? Scholars are bachelors to others scholars, I'm sure. I'm sure regardless of how you may feel about yourself, other scholars view you as a bachelor.

No, that’s not how it works.

 

[sojourner]

Do you accept writings on tablets? Is that physical evidence?

Sure, as long as the dates and provenance match up.

 

[sojourner]

ex•e•ge•sis ĕk″sə-jē′sĭs
►

• n.
  Critical explanation or analysis, especially of a text.
• n.
  The exposition or interpretation of any literary production or passage; more particularly, the exposition or interpretation of Scripture. See exegetical theology, under exegetical.
• n.
  A discourse intended to explain or illustrate a subject; specifically, an exercise in Biblical interpretation sometimes prescribed to students of theology when on examination preliminary to licensure or ordination.
  
  Sorry but you aren’t making any sense, not sure where you’re teaching or getting your degree.

Of course you’re not sure. You don’t work in this field, and you’re confused. I don’t know where you’re getting your definitions, but this one isn’t terse enough. The first one is close. Scholars exegete texts all the time when writing scholarly commentaries. It’s not really a “student” activity.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Of course you’re not sure. You don’t work in this field, and you’re confused. I don’t know where you’re getting your definitions, but this one isn’t terse enough. The first one is close. Scholars exegete texts all the time when writing scholarly commentaries. It’s not really a “student” activity.

Now you sound like the early Catholic leaders, so smart they are idolaters and false teachers.

 

[sojourner]

You claim
///The Bible is a collection of men's writings about how they idealized God. And should be taken as a source of contemplation, discussion, and debate (as it was intended by the authors, and users, originally).//
Says who ? The bible does not say this about itself. None of the authors say this is how things should be understood.
The Author John literally tells us why he's writing for example .
1 John 5:13

“These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.”
Many books and epistles say a similar things as why they are writing ,to whom ,when and where ect
So your doing exactly my point . Can you show anywhere in the bible it says what your saying ? If not why do you believe that ?

Most examples of literature don’t do that — especially ancient literature. Literary scholars can tell by the devices used what kind of literature it is. The long tradition of Talmud also clues us to the fact that these texts have a history of being debated. That’s who says so.

 

[sojourner]

Now you sound like the early Catholic leaders, so smart they are idolaters and false teachers.

False equivalency.

 

[sojourner]

This literally makes no sense . Again if you read the bible as if its not true then what do you expect ?

We’re not reading it as if it’s not true. We’re reading it for what it is

 

[ElishaElijah]

False equivalency.

Not at all, you are insinuating that it’s not a “student” activity when it is every believers activity to study and show themselves approved of God, rightly dividing the Word of God. The believer doesn’t need a teacher or leader to know the Scriptures but the Holy Spirit will teach that person.

 

[sojourner]

Not at all, you are insinuating that it’s not a “student” activity when it is every believers activity to study and show themselves approved of God, rightly dividing the Word of God. The believer doesn’t need a teacher or leader to know the Scriptures but the Holy Spirit will teach that person.

Not in matters of exegesis

 

[ElishaElijah]

Not in matters of exegesis

That’s where you’re wrong.

 

[sojourner]

That’s where you’re wrong.

The Holy Spirit doesn’t exegete texts.

 

[John1.12]

We’re not reading it as if it’s not true. We’re reading it for what it is

//We’re reading it for what it is// Erm which is .....Reading it as if its not true .

 

[sojourner]

//We’re reading it for what it is// Erm which is .....Reading it as if its not true .

Whatever makes you feel better about yourself.