The story of Samson

[johnnyjones]

Actually they’re also questioned or rationalized, if you knew where to look.

I get you. I’m speaking basically in Christendom. Who really questions St. Paul being taken up to the third heaven or Lazarus being resurrected among multiple other miracles.

 

[GEddie]

I get you. I’m speaking basically in Christendom. Who really questions St. Paul being taken up to the third heaven or Lazarus being resurrected among multiple other miracles.

I don’t imagine the SP account ever being seriously questioned. It’s less a miracle than an “out of body experience,” which modern culture has embraced. In fact, I imagine that his account in 2Co 12 is the source of the modern term.

And in a world where resuscitations from near death now occur en masse, Lazarus is also less hard to believe.

ICXC NIKA

 

[johnnyjones]

I don’t imagine the SP account ever being seriously questioned. It’s less a miracle than an “out of body experience,” which modern culture has embraced. In fact, I imagine that his account in 2Co 12 is the source of the modern term.

And in a world where resuscitations from near death now occur en masse, Lazarus is also less hard to believe.

ICXC NIKA

Do you really need me to get specific with the miracles of Jesus? Calming storms, resurrecting his own 3 day dead bludgeoned body, instantly turning water into wine. Those miracles are not questioned by the faithful yet OT acts of God are.

 

[wiggbuggie]

just heard today that archeoligists found a coin depicting samson fighting a lion dating to the 11th centuary BC time of the judges in Israel history:

paulinemaria.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-seal-of-samson-found-by.html

I was listening to a contemporary christian radio station on my way to work and they mentioned it I was so excited and looked it up online.

 

[patg]

Actually they’re also questioned or rationalized, if you knew where to look.

And, there is no requirement to accept any but a small handful as literally true. Let legends be legends.

But the church ***does ***dogmatically state that scripture contains many literary forms and *does not *exclude all “miracles” from this statement.

 

[patrick457]

And, there is no requirement to accept any but a small handful as literally true. Let legends be legends.

But the church ***does ***dogmatically state that scripture contains many literary forms and does not exclude all “miracles” from this statement.

Two cents. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: there is this tendency among us moderns to give the words ‘myth’ and ‘legend’ negative connotations. ‘Myth’, for example, is the word often used to mean ‘spurious, undocumented fictional stuff which only gullible cooks would actually waste their time with’.

 

[patg]

Two cents. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: there is this tendency among us moderns to give the words ‘myth’ and ‘legend’ negative connotations. ‘Myth’, for example, is the word often used to mean ‘spurious, undocumented fictional stuff which only gullible cooks would actually waste their time with’.

Classifying something as a myth or legend defines its literary form, it does not comment on whether the story is true or false. One also has to realize that fiction, legend, myth, poetry, etc all can teach truth without being literalistically true.

 

[patrick457]

Classifying something as a myth or legend defines its literary form, it does not comment on whether the story is true or false. One also has to realize that fiction, legend, myth, poetry, etc all can teach truth without being literalistically true.

That I agree with.

 

[Nelka]

My question; Are we to take the story of Samson literally?

Yes.