tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post1719691382600177194..comments2023-12-26T10:22:04.630-05:00Comments on Things of My Soul: Scriptures: Everything Need Not Be LiteralPapa Dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-58248781785340629602011-02-04T01:40:25.056-05:002011-02-04T01:40:25.056-05:00Yeah, it's cool. We don't have to agree 1...Yeah, it's cool. We don't have to agree 100% about everything to be brothers and sisters on the same path. :-)Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-77041717356050290112011-02-04T01:16:24.464-05:002011-02-04T01:16:24.464-05:00okey-dokey. As I said, I had other stuff on the br...okey-dokey. As I said, I had other stuff on the brain as I commented, so sorry it that went beyond the scope of your post. (I still am not sure I agree with you 100%, but that's ok. ;) )Michellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08215431222961203620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-75769980245646154032011-02-03T11:32:03.378-05:002011-02-03T11:32:03.378-05:00Michelle, if you notice, I was very careful to say...Michelle, if you notice, I was very careful to say that I am focusing on the "most ancient" records - using the OT before David and the Book of Ether as my examples. <br /><br />When you get back that far in history, there simply is no way to tell what is literal and what is not. At the core, that's all I'm saying.Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-13429119965753850512011-02-03T05:02:58.071-05:002011-02-03T05:02:58.071-05:00There is NOTHING in the most ancient records, in m...<i> There is NOTHING in the most ancient records, in my opinion, that MUST be literal </i><br /><br />Ray, I can buy having an open mind, but this to me takes it too far. <br /><br />But then again, I'm coming from a discussion that addresses BoM as fiction (the whole book) and I think such a model is unsustainable in our doctrine.<br /><br />I also think this model, while allowing for human Michellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08215431222961203620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-58789566715810326352011-02-02T14:09:02.367-05:002011-02-02T14:09:02.367-05:00"They ALL have biases built into them by the ..."They ALL have biases built into them by the authors"<br /><br />This perfectly says what I believe. <br /><br />All scripture was written by people. Some of it is more inspired, some of it is less inspired. Racial, cultural, scientific blind spots abound, and all of that comes into play when a person writes scripture.<br /><br />Add to that the transmission through multiple languages, Matthewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-51340785794393171782011-02-02T13:22:23.415-05:002011-02-02T13:22:23.415-05:00"the_mormonion" - That is exactly how I ..."the_mormonion" - That is exactly how I feel. Being able to accept that any given passage might be literal OR figurative / allegorical / mythological / etc. - and even being able to consider the benefit of interpreting any given story as BOTH (since we can't know for sure), opens up all kinds of possibilities for lessons that taking only one approach simply can't afford. <br />Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-17617839156148131472011-02-02T13:16:02.878-05:002011-02-02T13:16:02.878-05:00Michelle, it's not that I try to "figure ...Michelle, it's not that I try to "figure out" what it literal and what is not. It's just that I am open to the idea that not everything in our canonized scripture is literal. To me, there is GREAT benefit to be gained from that. <br /><br />1) Our own Article of Faith includes the phrase "as far as it is translated correctly" - and the Book of Mormon has multiple Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-78871909786463017782011-02-02T08:47:37.696-05:002011-02-02T08:47:37.696-05:00A very interesting take, one that most church memb...A very interesting take, one that most church members would reject. I, on the other hand, am in agreement. You may find my take on Old Testament events enlightening, in that regard. I take issue with your statement that there is no way we can know which Old Testament events were literal or mythical. There is a clear methodology, based in comparative mythology, ancient cosmology and plasma physicsAnthony E. Larsonhttp://www.mormonprophecy.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-10284542927219207852011-02-02T04:39:26.158-05:002011-02-02T04:39:26.158-05:00Great insight. Many in the Church don't realiz...Great insight. Many in the Church don't realize the strength of their position; that is, we believe in the objective truth of the scriptures while at the same time allowing for symbolism and even error. This isn't a common view among other Christians, who almost always favor one side (too conservative, or literal) or the other (too liberal, or subjective).the_mormonionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12477702897467910306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-6878194775045939592011-02-02T04:02:29.916-05:002011-02-02T04:02:29.916-05:00So I'd be interested in your thoughts about wh...So I'd be interested in your thoughts about what is to be gained from not believing they are literal. It feels like an awful lot of work for no real fruits to try to go that route. I'm not saying that the least path of resistance is always the best way to go.<br /><br />But sometimes it can be. <br /><br />I also think if we get too literal about trying to 'figure out' the Michellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08215431222961203620noreply@blogger.com