Quality books. Great conversations.
https://www.booktalk.org/
Not exactly, Penny. The main purpose of scripture is salvation. The main purpose of literature is expression. Salvation is a relation with The Eternal; expression, how an individual participates in an era. Even high literature -- like the Aeneid, The Divine Comedy, Pilgrim's Progress, and Paradise Lost -- is not scripture. There is too much of the personality of the author in it.Penelope wrote:Literature is scripture (writings) isn't it Tom?
The books of the Bible were written by authors from their own experience and persepective. Please do not get me wrong, I am not suggesting that the prophets from the Bible can be compared to modern authors, Homer is modern in comparison but, is it possible that the books of the Bible were influenced by the personality of the writers? I do believe expression does impact the Bible, and scripture. I say this only because of how different the interpretations are percieved not only be the readers of scripture, but also by the preachers of scripture.The main purpose of scripture is salvation. The main purpose of literature is expression.
(Genesis 9:25).". . .descendants of Ham are condemned to be servants of servants unto their brethren"
You are quite right! I'd forgotten the very end.Penelope wrote:
I didn't read it like this. This is how I read it:-
Alex, after having been brainwashed, felt sick at the thought of doing a violent act, but he still wanted to do it......and my goodness, I wanted him to do it too......because I wanted him to choose...
Eventually, he married the girl he raped earlier in the book.....and she 'balanced him'. He didn't want his children to be how he was and so, he 'chose' not be be 'nasty'. Maybe there are two endings.
Not exactly. Scripture differs from other writings by being inspired by Brahman, God, Allah, the Will of Heaven, the Cosmic Whole, etc. The Bible is only a small part of scripture, and not necessarily the most important part. Persons who write scripture do not claim it as a personal product, as the many POD authors who appear at BookTalk doSuz wrote:The books of the Bible were written by authors from their own experience and persepective.
Sometimes, if we go back to the original meaning of the words, I find it can serve to clarify, what has become obscured over time.The main purpose of scripture is salvation.
Certainly in the bodies of writing that have acquired this status of scripture, there are expressions that have a timeless truth. There are also many examples of totally time-bound thinking, thinking that justified the status quo and became outmoded when the society perished or changed. The designation "scripture" in itself does not confer any quality of timeless truth. It is writing that church authorities elevated to official status, an act that was to some degree arbitrary.Thomas Hood wrote:[There is, I think, only one issue in scripture: How can the ephemeral human creature have enduring value? And, so far as I know, there is only one answer: Enduring value comes by accord with the Eternal Moral Order. All else is vanity.Tom
Uh, Penny, you're etymologizingPenelope wrote:Sometimes, if we go back to the original meaning of the words, I find it can serve to clarify, what has become obscured over time.
, which isn't the same as defining, however entertaining a diversion it may be. Scripture isn't 'magical'; it's holy and sacred.At which point you have lost all the nice atheists at BookTalk, who don't admit to having eternal souls in need of Divine Salvation, it seems.The word 'Salvation' means 'Healing' not 'saving' and I envision it as healing our fractured natures. Not 'saving' our souls, which are eternal anyway.
I often misread not because meanings have changed but because I don't know the original context.Things do get lost in translation, as words take on different meanings over the centuries, don't they?
That is a generous admission and leaves the door wide openDWill wrote:Certainly in the bodies of writing that have acquired this status of scripture, there are expressions that have a timeless truth.
True, it is an aesthetic-ethical judgment.The designation "scripture" in itself does not confer any quality of timeless truth.
My opinion is that they exercised better judgment than is usually exercised today.It is writing that church authorities elevated to official status, an act that was to some degree arbitrary.
Can't argue with an expert on semantics. Don't care to either.you're etymologizing , which isn't the same as defining,
Nielson, The PointWe see what we want to see and hear what we want to hear.
Sometimes, the meanings have been changed deliberately in what seem minor and subtle ways.....but which change the meaning completely.I often misread not because meanings have changed but because I don't know the original context.