STR - Divine meaning - Revision history

Dubbayou2 at 18:08, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T18:08:16Z

Dubbayou2 at 18:06, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T18:06:16Z

Dubbayou2 at 18:05, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T18:05:45Z

Dubbayou2 at 18:04, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T18:04:57Z

Dubbayou2 at 18:03, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T18:03:53Z

Dubbayou2: Created page with " Since God’s word is established forever 2Sa 7:25 And now, O LORD God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and..."

2018-06-02T18:02:04Z

Created page with "<font face="TimesNewRoman" size=3> Since God’s word is established forever <ref>2Sa 7:25 And now, O LORD God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and..."

New page

<font face="TimesNewRoman" size=3>

Since God’s word is established forever <ref>[[2Sa 7:25]] And now, O LORD God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and concerning his house, establish [it] for ever, and do as thou hast said.</ref>, a metaphor/shadow/symbol means the same thing everywhere is it used. If a donkey is a metaphor of a prophet, everywhere there is a donkey, it is a metaphor of a prophet. This rule alone makes the metaphors humanly impossible to fabricate as it requires the interlocking of a double entendre found in all the scriptures. (This keeps us in awe)

Be careful not to read the paragraph above too quickly. Some have passed over the most important part: If a donkey is a metaphor of a prophet, everywhere there is a donkey, it is a metaphor of a prophet. Many who try to interpret scripture allow themselves that privilege of saying when something is a symbol and when it is not. They might say something like "Sometimes a donkey is just a donkey."

They also permit themselves to create free-for-all allegory, saying that we cannot expect the many authors to use symbols universally the same. Some would even say that since the human authors knew nothing of Christ, we cannot expect them to speak of him at all.

The fact that it is impossible for men to invent meaning and apply it consistently in this fashion is the very proof that only God could have done it. The men knew nothing of Christ, yet consistently spoke of him in the same symbols.

Free-for-all allegory has been properly criticized because allegorical or metaphoric meanings produced in this manner have no way to be verified. When it is attempted, we are persuaded by the loudest proponent of a meaning. This rule of "Divine meaning" dis-allows free-for-all allegory by setting an impossible standard for the use of allegory. Every donkey is a prophet, every garment is a work, etc. such that every scripture participates in a hidden picture of Christ. Such a phenomenon is impossible for men to produce and therefore when we observe it occurring, we can have confidence that it is God’s intended meaning.

'''Consequence of lack of applying the Divine meaning rule'''
:The resulting interpretation is likely to be free-for-all allegory and eisegesis.

:Back: [[TYMK - contents]]
:Next: [[STR - Divine meaning]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:06, 2 June 2018
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:Back: [[TYMK - contents]] --> [[STR - Rules TOC]]		:Back: [[TYMK - contents]] --> [[STR - Rules TOC]]
	:Next: [[STR - Christocentric]]		:Next: [[STR - Christocentric]]
		+
		+	=References=
		+	<references/>

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:05, 2 June 2018
Line 15:		Line 15:


−	:Back: [[TYMK - contents]]	+	:Back: [[TYMK - contents]] --> [[STR - Rules TOC]]
	:Next: [[STR - Christocentric]]		:Next: [[STR - Christocentric]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:04, 2 June 2018
Line 16:		Line 16:

	:Back: [[TYMK - contents]]		:Back: [[TYMK - contents]]
−	:Next: [[STR - ~~Divine meaning~~]]	+	:Next: [[STR - Christocentric]]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 The fact that it is impossible for men to invent meaning and apply it consistently in this fashion is the very proof that only God could have done it. The men knew nothing of Christ, yet consistently spoke of him in the same symbols.
-Free-for-all allegory has been properly criticized because allegorical or metaphoric meanings produced in this manner have no way to be verified. When it is attempted, we are persuaded by the loudest proponent of a meaning. This rule of "Divine meaning" dis-allows free-for-all allegory by setting an impossible standard for the use of allegory. Every donkey is a prophet, every garment is a work, etc. such that every scripture participates in a hidden picture of Christ. Such a phenomenon is impossible for men to produce and therefore when we observe it occurring, we can have confidence that it is God’s intended meaning.
+Free-for-all allegory has been properly criticized because allegorical or metaphoric meanings produced in this manner have no way to be verified. When it is attempted, we are persuaded by the loudest proponent of a meaning.
 '''Consequence of lack of applying the Divine meaning rule'''

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Since God’s word is established forever <ref>[[2Sa 7:25]] And now, O LORD God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and concerning his house, establish [it] for ever, and do as thou hast said.</ref>, a metaphor/shadow/symbol means the same thing everywhere is it used. If a donkey is a metaphor of a prophet, everywhere there is a donkey, it is a metaphor of a prophet. This rule alone makes the metaphors humanly impossible to fabricate as it requires the interlocking of a double entendre found in all the scriptures. (This keeps us in awe)
-Be careful not to read the paragraph above too quickly. Some have passed over the most important part: If a donkey is a metaphor of a prophet, everywhere there is a donkey, it is a metaphor of a prophet. Many who try to interpret  scripture allow themselves that privilege of saying when something is a symbol and when it is not. They might say something like "Sometimes a donkey is just a donkey."
+Be careful not to read the paragraph above too quickly. Some have passed over the most important part: If a donkey is a metaphor of a prophet, everywhere there is a donkey, it is a metaphor of a prophet. Many who try to interpret  scripture allow themselves the privilege of saying when something is a symbol, and when it is not. They might say something like "Sometimes a donkey is just a donkey."
 They also permit themselves to create free-for-all allegory, saying that we cannot expect the  many authors to use symbols universally the same. Some would even say that since the human authors knew nothing of Christ, we cannot expect them to speak of him at all.
 The fact that it is impossible for men to invent meaning and apply it consistently in this fashion is the very proof that only God could have done it. The men knew nothing of Christ, yet consistently spoke of him in the same symbols.
 Free-for-all allegory has been properly criticized because allegorical or metaphoric meanings produced in this manner have no way to be verified. When it is attempted, we are persuaded by the loudest proponent of a meaning. This rule of "Divine meaning" dis-allows free-for-all allegory by setting an impossible standard for the use of allegory. Every donkey is a prophet, every garment is a work, etc. such that every scripture participates in a hidden picture of Christ. Such a phenomenon is impossible for men to produce and therefore when we observe it occurring, we can have confidence that it is God’s intended meaning.
 '''Consequence of lack of applying the Divine meaning rule'''
-:The resulting interpretation is likely to be free-for-all allegory and eisegesis.
+:The resulting interpretation is likely to be free-for-all allegory and eisegesis (reading meaning in to scripture which is not there).
 :Back: [[TYMK - contents]]
 :Next: [[STR - Divine meaning]]