[Serious] Literal and Not Literal

[Belacqua]

We don't live our life by scientific or historic facts either. So what do we live our life by?

So, are you going to answer my question, or no?

Acrobat can answer this on his own, I'm sure, but I think I've already addressed this.

A holy book is holy because people think it's holy. Someone somewhere found the book worthwhile, probably wise, perhaps numinous. The people who find the book this way think it is useful in thinking about how to live one's life. 

The book itself may or may not contain specific facts or advice. Holy books are in large part holy because they have a history -- they are woven into the culture. The holiness of the book is the book itself plus all the commentary, midrash, response, and argument that came from it. Though you may find the text itself too strange to admire, the responses of people over millennia constitute a dialectic through which we ponder important questions. 

We may not live our lives according to the bare historical fact that good people may well find themselves in conflict with their societies. Our interpretation, use, and response to this bare fact, however, is meaningful. 

The interpretation we do for ourselves is a part of the meaning. Un-interpreted, no text is meaningful in this holy way. Clear statements, of the type that people here think God should give us, require no interpretation, but it is the very act of thinking and engaging with things that makes them important to us.

Harold Bloom, who is Jewish by background and atheist by belief, says "make Dante your textbook." Yet very little of what Dante wrote is true in a science-type way.

[The Grand Nudger]

Are you sure about that? You’d have to have an awfully narrow definition of sciencey™ to make that claim with confidence.

Even such a ludicrous idea as genitalia trolls may be capable of expressing and describing a wide swathe of biological truths regarding human reproduction. Those would be “science-type” true if we analyzed them, I assume?

[EgoDeath]

@Belaqua

You blew a lot of hot air without saying a whole lot.

If we are taking "holy" to mean "divine" or "having divine qualities"...

1. Someone, or a even a lot of people, saying something is divine, does not make it so.

2. A book being woven into the history and/or culture of a place or people does not make it divine.

3. You still have not differentiated how a book, if it isn't directly from god, is any more worth following than another book.

[Belacqua]

@Belaqua

You blew a lot of hot air without saying a whole lot.

If we are taking "holy" to mean "divine" or "having divine qualities"...

1. Someone, or a even a lot of people, saying something is divine, does not make it so.

2. A book being woven into the history and/or culture of a place or people does not make it divine.

3. You still have not differentiated how a book, if it isn't directly from god, is any more worth following than another book.

Right, I was saying why people find book to be holy. Whether that means it's also divine or not is another question. 

If you want to take a stand that only things that provably come from god can be holy, then we're using the word in different ways. That's OK. 

I have in fact addressed why a book that doesn't come directly from God can be more worth following than another book. First, because it's a good book, and second, because lots of people have enriched the reading of the book by interpreting and responding to it. 

Sometimes people say that since the Bible is fiction, they might as well follow Harry Potter. Leaving aside the literary qualities of Harry Potter books, I agree with this -- provided that Harry Potter books provoke 2000 years of serious commentary which we also have access to.

[The Grand Nudger]

- and what of Other Things™ serious consideration of Harry Potter might provoke?

If it leads to fewer holy wars would that not devalue magic book as the vehicle for a neutral rider of a message, of meaning. Not tethered to historic or scientific facts?


Are you telling us anything more than your already demonstrated preference of opinion for magic book over Harry Potter?

Even if everyone preferred magic book to Harry Potter, but Harry Potter was the objectively better vessel by reference to neutral riding message, wouldn’t magic book still be comparatively deficient? Regardless of whether it were “god inspired”? Maybe Rowling is the more competent author. Shrugs.

Still no confirmation on the issue of your not believing in a literal....historic......scientific Christ, btw.

[Acrobat]

We don't live our life by scientific or historic facts either. So what do we live our life by?

So, are you going to answer my question, or no?

Sure, I thought I did in other parts, but okay.

It doesn’t follow that even if a book were the direct word of God, that it would be a book to live our life by. In fact why would I need any book to tell me of the life I ought to live? Why not just show me a sort of life worth living instead?

Why not show us a profound sort of life, that those of us who see it, would want?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

So, are you going to answer my question, or no?

Sure, I thought I did in other parts, but okay.

It doesn’t follow that even if a book were the direct word of God, that it would be a book to live our life by. In fact why would I need any book to tell me of the life I ought to live? Why not just show me a sort of life worth living instead?

Why not show us a profound sort of life, that those of us who see it, would want?

I could have sworn I proposed this sort of thing several pages ago...

Boru

[Acrobat]

The

Sure, I thought I did in other parts, but okay.

It doesn’t follow that even if a book were the direct word of God, that it would be a book to live our life by. In fact why would I need any book to tell me of the life I ought to live? Why not just show me a sort of life worth living instead?

Why not show us a profound sort of life, that those of us who see it, would want?

I could have sworn I proposed this sort of thing several pages ago...

Boru

Average minds think alike

Acro

[The Grand Nudger]

One wonders why, if we can directly apprehend the good...we need any prompt or demonstration of a good life to begin with.

We’ll work that out, and be better equipped for possessed knowledge than pious recital. It’ll even include the historic and scientific facts of the borders of a good life, lol.

[EgoDeath]

Right, I was saying why people find book to be holy. Whether that means it's also divine or not is another question.

If you want to take a stand that only things that provably come from god can be holy, then we're using the word in different ways. That's OK.

What do you propose the word holy means, if not divine?

I have in fact addressed why a book that doesn't come directly from God can be more worth following than another book. First, because it's a good book, and second, because lots of people have enriched the reading of the book by interpreting and responding to it.

Don't give yourself so much credit. You've hardly done or said anything. You're known on AF for waxing poetic; making excessively wordy posts without really saying much (all the while making particularly apologetic posts concerning Christianity, one wonders if you actually are a Christian), but I'm asking a very simple question here and looking for a very simple answer.

Sometimes people say that since the Bible is fiction, they might as well follow Harry Potter. Leaving aside the literary qualities of Harry Potter books, I agree with this -- provided that Harry Potter books provoke 2000 years of serious commentary which we also have access to.

Who says the Bible "provoke[s] 2000 years of serious commentary?" You? Great. I think I'll finish up the Sorcerer's Stone instead.

Sure, I thought I did in other parts, but okay.

You certainly didn't. You responded to my question with a question.

It doesn’t follow that even if a book were the direct word of God, that it would be a book to live our life by. In fact why would I need any book to tell me of the life I ought to live? Why not just show me a sort of life worth living instead?

It wouldn't be? If there was an ultimate creator that delivered this book to us because it is supposedly very concerned with our Earthly affairs... you don't think that's something you might want to take some lifestyle cues from? ...What?

Why not show us a profound sort of life, that those of us who see it, would want?

Or instead, why not give us simple, literal instructions on how to live, since this all-knowing being knows the best for us?