Liberals love to redefine words, home cooking, as a ploy to avoid truth. First we had "exaggeration is a lie" and now we get "take the log out of your eye.is not hyperbole. Next expect claims the following biblical words have a Calvinist meaning: draw always means compel, adoption means rebirth, and foreknow means prescience.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Hyperbole used by God?
- Thread starter agedman
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps it would be good to readdress @John of Japan complaint concerning my view regarding God’s Word and God’s word.
Earlier I used the illustration of an author of a book and along that same line, I will use that of the doctoral dissertation .
To complete an academic doctoral program of note, one must submit for review and defense a major work, and often of great length, which is called the dissertation. Unlike a graduate (bachelor or master) thesis in which one is putting forth research of a topic based largely upon what others have written, and is much less in length, the dissertation goes much further into the development of something new which must be defended and proven before a board of peers.
What both major works do is to cite other’s writing as original sources to compare and contrast. The statements of others are placed in quotes, blocked, or in some manner separated and notated so the original source can be found by others and verified for accuracy.
If one quotes without citation of the source, it is called plagiarism.
The author of the dissertation cannot rightly claim ownership of what someone else said or wrote. The author may only quote with proper citations or not use that information. Found plagiarism brings total discredit and end to anyone’s ability to be taken seriously in a field of work.
I hold that God divinely inspired and dictated to those of His choosing what is recorded in His word. That nothing was written that God did not directly command. In this, unless I am mistaken, @John of Japan and I would find agreement.
The disagreement perhaps is that I view God quoting others similar to the doctoral dissertations citations. Such citations are not the author’s own words, but placed by the author into the dissertation by the author for the purpose of the author. That by inclusion in the dissertation, the author acknowledges the original source, but such is not presented as their own words - for that would be plagiarism.
God quoting Cain does not raise Cain to the level of the authority of God, but because God dictated to the writers what to write Cains words are included in the word of God, we title all written as The Word of God but not all written were God’s Words.
I contended in an early post that three times Paul showed he understood this same concept.
I really do not present @John of Japan as thinking that God put the words used by Cain, Haman, Jezabel, and others of repugnant character found in the Scriptures as quoting Him. The writers wrote what God dictated, just as a secretary records the words of the boss without change. Despite that verbal and written language is part of the creative work of God, it was not exempt from humankind’s corruption. The dissertation (The Scriptures) can quote the words and record the failures of others without being blemished.
Earlier I used the illustration of an author of a book and along that same line, I will use that of the doctoral dissertation .
To complete an academic doctoral program of note, one must submit for review and defense a major work, and often of great length, which is called the dissertation. Unlike a graduate (bachelor or master) thesis in which one is putting forth research of a topic based largely upon what others have written, and is much less in length, the dissertation goes much further into the development of something new which must be defended and proven before a board of peers.
What both major works do is to cite other’s writing as original sources to compare and contrast. The statements of others are placed in quotes, blocked, or in some manner separated and notated so the original source can be found by others and verified for accuracy.
If one quotes without citation of the source, it is called plagiarism.
The author of the dissertation cannot rightly claim ownership of what someone else said or wrote. The author may only quote with proper citations or not use that information. Found plagiarism brings total discredit and end to anyone’s ability to be taken seriously in a field of work.
I hold that God divinely inspired and dictated to those of His choosing what is recorded in His word. That nothing was written that God did not directly command. In this, unless I am mistaken, @John of Japan and I would find agreement.
The disagreement perhaps is that I view God quoting others similar to the doctoral dissertations citations. Such citations are not the author’s own words, but placed by the author into the dissertation by the author for the purpose of the author. That by inclusion in the dissertation, the author acknowledges the original source, but such is not presented as their own words - for that would be plagiarism.
God quoting Cain does not raise Cain to the level of the authority of God, but because God dictated to the writers what to write Cains words are included in the word of God, we title all written as The Word of God but not all written were God’s Words.
I contended in an early post that three times Paul showed he understood this same concept.
I really do not present @John of Japan as thinking that God put the words used by Cain, Haman, Jezabel, and others of repugnant character found in the Scriptures as quoting Him. The writers wrote what God dictated, just as a secretary records the words of the boss without change. Despite that verbal and written language is part of the creative work of God, it was not exempt from humankind’s corruption. The dissertation (The Scriptures) can quote the words and record the failures of others without being blemished.
Last edited:
Get it right, the parts of speech are noun, verb, adjective, etc.
Perhaps you mean figures of speech?
This thread got a bit side tracked, so perhaps it may be good to review a couple Scriptures to see if hyperbole in the form of exaggeration is used in statements by God (Christ).
Is Luke 9 using hyperbole or is it stating fact?
Is Luke 9 using hyperbole or is it stating fact?
23And he said to all, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. 24For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. 25For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or forfeits himself? 26For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. 27But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”
How about in Matthew 23;
23“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. 24You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!
25“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean.
27“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. 28So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
25“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean.
27“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. 28So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
Oops thank you!
RighteousnessTemperance&
Well-Known Member
OK, how about addressing this? It has already been brought up. Twice. See posts #55 & #60.
You've missed my point all together with this post. We agree that when the Bible quotes Adam or Cain or even Satan (book of Job), it is simply recording by inspiration what they said as it is relevant to God's point in a passage. It is not revelation (truth for all from God), but it is inspired.
That has never been my point on this thread. I have brought up John 21:27 several times, and here it is again for reference: "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
I have said that this is hyperbole. I don't think you have disagreed.
Now, this quote is not from an enemy of God (Satan) or a rebel against God (Cain) or a non-Christian (the Judaizers in Acts, etc.). It is not a quote at all in the Bible, but simply what John wrote, inspired by God. And thus it is God's Word!! And it is very clearly hyperbole--I don't think you have disagreed with this.
It is God's Word just as much as the Ten Commandments were, written by the hand of God (an anthropomorphism) on stone. It is not some lesser Word of God.
So, the only way you can say that God never says hyperbole is if what John wrote in John 21:27 is somehow not the Word of God, or somehow less the Word of God than the Ten Commandments.
@agedman: Are you prepared to say that John 21:27 is somehow less of a statement from God than the Ten Commandments?
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Liberals make charge after charge, anything to avoid admitting "take the log out of your eye is hyperbole.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Yet another you, you,you post featuring false charges.
But surprising to me, Mr. Taylor did acknowledge a fundamental truth, God sometimes uses hyperbole, and such use does not constitute lying. PTL
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Repeating a false charge makes it twice as false.
Note the effort to change the subject away from the thread, which is God using hyperbole to make some points memorable.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
No, it is called holding you ACCOUNTABLE when you make outrageous claims about other members and then try to act like nothing happened and point fingers at others. I'm holding you to the fire on this one. You flat out called me, and others, liberals without basis.Repeating a false charge makes it twice as false.
Note the effort to change the subject away from the thread, which is God using hyperbole to make some points memorable.
And for the record, I conceded that the log instance could be considered hyperbole.
I am not a communist,I am a socialist.
I am not a socialist, I am a liberal.
I am not a liberal, I am a progressive.
I am not a progressive, I am a moderate.
Hyperbole can be presented with a simile, or metaphor, figure of speech, illustration or in other ways. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
I am not a socialist, I am a liberal.
I am not a liberal, I am a progressive.
I am not a progressive, I am a moderate.
Hyperbole can be presented with a simile, or metaphor, figure of speech, illustration or in other ways. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Hyperbole can be presented with a simile, or metaphor, figure of speech, illustration or in other ways. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
Liberals are "charge - o- matics." They tear down rather than build up.
They use "against the man" arguments to divert attention from bogus arguments.
They redefine words to fit their agenda.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
This is false. A hyperbole is NOT a comparison and therefore cannot also be a simile. Examples of Hyperbole
Not exclusive to liberals and you are guilty of this yourself. In fact, you did it in this very post.
Again, not exclusive to liberals. You are doing this in this very post.
Once again we see home cooked distinctions that are false, once again we see "two wrongs make a right" and once again we see a "you" off topic charge.
Let me use hyperbole: Liberals are like wandering stars, or clouds without water. To say that is all they are would be an exaggeration. To claim an exaggerated comparison could not be hyperbole is a liberal redefinition of the word.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
- Status