nonbeliever_92
Well-Known Member
Should the stories in scriptures, of any religion or faith, be taken as fact or symbols? I find that there are a couple of problems with both of these reasonings, but i just wish to know what other's thought.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Metaphorically Factual...?
- Thread starter nonbeliever_92
- Start date
ThisisZAK
Member
Hi,
I don't know for other religions & ways of life , but for Islamic scriptures, we must take them as facts (even though we can't imagine some of them properly) unless there is a proof (from the same scriptures that command us to take such or such figures as symbols.
Hope that it makes sens!
I don't know for other religions & ways of life , but for Islamic scriptures, we must take them as facts (even though we can't imagine some of them properly) unless there is a proof (from the same scriptures that command us to take such or such figures as symbols.
Hope that it makes sens!
Symbols can symbolize factual information. Facts can be symbolized, and facts can be symbols.
A symbol represents something, and that something it represents can be a fact. Similarly, a fact can be the symbol representing something else.
A metaphor is a sign in picture form, either visual or drawn in words, that can represent a fact. It can also represent a symbol.
Bits of the religious text can be taken as either fact or symbol, or both, but at best it is taken with a bit of theology to inform it.
A symbol represents something, and that something it represents can be a fact. Similarly, a fact can be the symbol representing something else.
A metaphor is a sign in picture form, either visual or drawn in words, that can represent a fact. It can also represent a symbol.
Bits of the religious text can be taken as either fact or symbol, or both, but at best it is taken with a bit of theology to inform it.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
If only those who take religion at face value knew a bit more theology.
Since the Bible is not one book, but 66, I would say some of it is symbolic and some of it literal.
nuf said
And that includes the religious texts written yesterday and on sale in the self-help section of bookstores everywhere.
Nothing in the Bible should be judged one way or the other upon early readings, and certainly not upon a single translation.
It should be studied extensively before such judgment should be cast as to what to take literally and what to take metaphorically.
It should be studied extensively before such judgment should be cast as to what to take literally and what to take metaphorically.
nonbeliever_92
Well-Known Member
But how wouls one decide which is factual and which is symbolical? (is that a word? symbolical?)
Ahh...i see...
Tee hee
tee hee again.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Symbols, with a few obvious exceptions (like the begats). Even the blatantly literal should be taken as mythic, rather than historically accurate. IOW, the metaphor should be the default assumption.
Indeed.
nonbeliever_92
Well-Known Member
A girl told me a couple days ago that the bible was literal, but metaphorical, is this even possible?
(A mind like a steel sieve.
)
nonbeliever_92
Well-Known Member
wow, that's almost like you even attempted to answer the question Jay!
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
Yet another thrilling response from Jay. Don't worry, because you're not on his intillectual level, he cannot dignify you with anything other than an insult. Don't take it personally, he's this friendly in 996 of every 1000 posts he makes.
To answer the question, religious books should be taken as stories given that it is difficult to verify their claims (unless you want to link Genesis and geology, then its downright embarrassing).
Then again if you're believing in this God fella, you might as well believe his silly little stories which are meant as a guide rather than a part of history taken as fact.
nonbeliever_92
Well-Known Member
well thank you darkendless
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
:grill:
Scarlett Wampus
psychonaut
This unwillingness to consider religious scripture as full of metaphor or sometimes plain wrong even as metaphor is one of the primary reasons for cultural tension between people of differing religions and even people of the same religion.
Unless they're schizoid most people who've developed beyond early stages of infancy can make distinctions between metaphorical truth and literal truth. Why then should I consider people who insist religious scripture must be interpreted literally as anything but infantile in their beliefs?
Alceste
Vagabond
Neither, IMO. I think the best word is:
al⋅le⋅go⋅ry 
[al-uh-gawr-ee, -gohr-ee] –noun, plural -ries.
1. a representation of an abstract or spiritual meaning through concrete or material forms; figurative treatment of one subject under the guise of another.
2. a symbolical narrative: the allegory of Piers Plowman.
3. emblem (def. 3).