I need help in understanding

[PJM]

My dear friends in Christ,

Can you please help me to understand precisely, what SOLA AND a Literal translation of the bible actually means, and how that applies to your faith practice.

Please be as specific as you can be.

God Bless you, and THANKS

Patrick

 

[Neofight]

Catechism of the Catholic Church
116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.” (110–114)

 

[badnewsbarrett]

My dear friends in Christ,

Can you please help me to understand precisely, what SOLA AND a Literal translation of the bible actually means, and how that applies to your faith practice.

Please be as specific as you can be.

God Bless you, and THANKS

Patrick

“Sola” translates most rigidly to “by oneself” or “alone.” More precisely though, it indicates a unique and special character of something rather than the total exclusion of everything else that also may have something to do with something. In other words, it is a bit like the exaltation of something, which is to say it is over and above everything else- not that those other things don’t exist or have any meaning at all. This is basically what is laid out in the most important articles of the Lutheran faith, as several Lutherans will tell you shortly.

As for “literal,” as far as I can tell, it means to get it right. The whole process of figuring it out begins with translation and with understanding the full range of meaning that different words can have, while taking into account the ways in which language changes over time, the type of writing and the one who writes it, the intended audience, and a few other things while also being flexible enough to correctly understand idioms. Overall though it’s just about getting it right. The principle mistake that I see with people who use the word “literal” most frequently is that they’ll figure out what is the most restrictive interpretation of something or the one that allows them to be most critical of otherwise fairly acceptable practices, and they will assume that this is what a strong commitment to “the literal meaning” is all about. I would like to say that the most restrictive interpretations are not always the right ones, though, and I’ll most likely have to return to what I originally said about getting it right.

In a way, you could look at the “literal” thing as a stand-in for the word “orthodox,” which my people don’t use very much at all. If I may hazard a guess, though, I would say that much of the way Catholics use the word “orthodox” (little o) relates pretty well to how Protestants tend to use the word “literal.” It’s basically about going through the right sort of process so that you can arrive at correct teaching.

 

[MaryT777]

…interested in learning more as well…

Mary.

 

[PJM]

=Neofight;13029295]Catechism of the Catholic Church
116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.” (110–114)

Sincere THANKS, but I know OUR Faith, which is why I posted in the non-catholic forum

 

[PJM]

=badnewsbarrett;13029306]“Sola” translates most rigidly to “by oneself” or “alone.” More precisely though, it indicates a unique and special character of something rather than the total exclusion of everything else that also may have something to do with something. In other words, it is a bit like the exaltation of something, which is to say it is over and above everything else- not that those other things don’t exist or have any meaning at all. This is basically what is laid out in the most important articles of the Lutheran faith, as several Lutherans will tell you shortly.

As for “literal,” as far as I can tell, it means to get it right. The whole process of figuring it out begins with translation and with understanding the full range of meaning that different words can have, while taking into account the ways in which language changes over time, the type of writing and the one who writes it, the intended audience, and a few other things while also being flexible enough to correctly understand idioms. Overall though it’s just about getting it right. The principle mistake that I see with people who use the word “literal” most frequently is that they’ll figure out what is the most restrictive interpretation of something or the one that allows them to be most critical of otherwise fairly acceptable practices, and they will assume that this is what a strong commitment to “the literal meaning” is all about. I would like to say that the most restrictive interpretations are not always the right ones, though, and I’ll most likely have to return to what I originally said about getting it right.

In a way, you could look at the “literal” thing as a stand-in for the word “orthodox,” which my people don’t use very much at all. If I may hazard a guess, though, I would say that much of the way Catholics use the word “orthodox” (little o) relates pretty well to how Protestants tend to use the word “literal.” It’s basically about going through the right sort of process so that you can arrive at correct teaching.

THANK you so very much:thumbsup:

God Bless you!

Patrick