S
Seamus_Sully
Guest
What is the literal interpretation of the Tree of Life (life’s tree)?
THANK YOU!
THANK YOU!
What is the literal interpretation of the Tree of Life (life’s tree)?
THANK YOU!
Um, that they were trees?What is the literal interpretation of the Tree of Life (life’s tree)?
What is the literal interpretation of the tree of knowldge?
You have to first learn grammar, before progressing to reading comprehension.These passages are about trees.
What is the literal meaning of these pasages?
I do not think for even a second that they are related to the Tree of Life or to the Tree of Knowledge. It’s your claim that they are. You prove it.I think that they are related to the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge, but HOW?
I am not saying it is impossible.
I am trying to comprehend the literal meaning of the Tree of Life.
Jesus is the Lamb of God (St. John 1: 29).
Herod is a fox (St. Luke 13: 32).
Issachar is a rawboned *** (Gen. 49: 14-15).
Dan is a serpent (Gen. 49: 17).
Joseph is a wild colt (Gen. 49: 22).
Benjamin is a ravenous wolf (Gen. 49: 27).
We are sheep.
So my question: what is the literal meaning of the above passages?
No it doesn’t.Now back to my questioning.
This passage seems to be saying, people are trees.
Naw, it goes the other way around: the one who claims it isn’t what it says, has the burden of proving that it isn’t. That’s always and forever. And that proof better not knock out tenets of the faith. See, by whatever standard Joe Citizen interprets Genesis or Samuel or Kings as nothing but figurative myth, he can also interpret the gospels as nothing but figurative myth. It will always be that way, and the result is a god who doesn’t deserve a capital-G. The result is a god who never performed a single miracle. Be careful how you split the text. Figures of speech are found all over the Bible, but that doesn’t mean that everything is just figurative. You know what I’m saying??Why should we have to accept all of the stuff in the Book of Genesis as being exactly what it says in plain English? I cannot see how not doing that reflects on the New Testament and makes it incredible. Just as Scully needs to learn English Grammer someone else needs to learn how to discern genres of literature.
I hate to disagree with you, but I do not accept that for the Bible “one size fits all” nor does myth and fiction in some parts of the OT have to mean that the same applies to all the books. Like I recommended kiddo. Learn your genres and you will find there is nothing there that contradicts Catholic Teaching when you listen to the Magisterium for the final decisiont as to what something means. Further in reading scripture people derive lessons that apply only to themselves as individuals and they have no business trying to tell everyone that that is the only meaning.Naw, it goes the other way around: the one who claims it isn’t what it says, has the burden of proving that it isn’t. That’s always and forever. And that proof better not knock out tenets of the faith. See, by whatever standard Joe Citizen interprets Genesis or Samuel or Kings as nothing but figurative myth, he can also interpret the gospels as nothing but figurative myth. It will always be that way, and the result is a god who doesn’t deserve a capital-G. The result is a god who never performed a single miracle. Be careful how you split the text. Figures of speech are found all over the Bible, but that doesn’t mean that everything is just figurative. You know what I’m saying??
I didn’t advocate a “one size fits all,” but the admonition that Genesis can’t be literal is such an idea, and it will always result in Kings and Samuel and the Gospels being non-literal as well, because they contain the same genre of writing. When you have the same type of writing, the same rules must apply. Therein is the rub. Perhaps you are not consistently applying the same rules of interpretation to all books within a given genre.I hate to disagree with you, but I do not accept that for the Bible “one size fits all” nor does myth and fiction in some parts of the OT have to mean that the same applies to all the books.