Interpret that metaphorically

The line above jumped out at me when reading this thread, and I just couldn't help myself

I think Matthew 12:40 (PYV)* implies that a literal man who was literally named Jonah was literally in the literal belly of a literal whale/big fish/miscellaneous whopper of an aquatic creature

* (PYV = Pick Your Version )

Pete

 

Laugh all you like. Your reply simply shows that you don't care all that much about what scripture says. I pointed out that it was scripturally consistent to have mountains dropping wine, and for God to have fingers, and instead of arguing with me from scripture, you just laugh at me. Well, I don't care what you think of me, but if your arguments made any sense you'd argue from scripture. All you've done is exalt your own pre-conceieved opinion, e.g. about God not having fingers, above the words of the Bible. You then laugh at anyone who believes what the Bible says, because you can't argue with them from scripture.

Does this remind anyone else of the Roman Catholic attitude? "Oh, you ignoramus - you don't have the 'common sense' or the 'learning'
or the 'experience' to understand the genre! Ask me, and I'll tell you what that means! I'll laugh at you if you take the Bible literally!" Well, I'm just glad I haven't got the "learnig" that tells me I can't believe God has fingers. If you read anything else about a person, and it talked about their fingers, you'd believe they had fingers. Why not God?

 

Bartholomew,

I appologize. I didn't mean to anger you. And I didn't mean to say that you should just ask me.

However, what you say is my preconceived notions about scripture have been formed by time spent studying what scripture says. The difference between us is that I know I come to scripture witha particular point of view, and you want to deny it and say you are simply saying what scripture is saying. This is a preconceieved notion about scripture too. WE CANNOT ESCAPE HAVING PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS!

 

Bartholomew,

I would say that God is not like us and so talking about him having fingers is simply a way of accomidating our understanding of the ineffiable.

 

Hi bro,
Sorry if I came across really brash, but I totally disagree with you. God is like us in many ways. He can think, he knows right and wrong, etc. So just because he is different in some ways, he's the same in others. As for accomodating him to our understanding, well this would be a good argument is the Bible told us God didn't really have fingers; but it doesn't. In fact, as it stands, you're exhalting opinion about what God may or may not look like over what the Bible says.

How does knowing Psalms is poetry mean God doesn't have fingers? Exodus is history, and in chapter 33 we're told God as a face, at least one hand (can't he have fingers?), and a back! He tells Moses he can't see his face and live, he covers him with his hand, and Moses actually sees his back! He must have body parts!
If in doubt, take it literally; no matter what anyone says about "genre".

Your friend and brother,

Bartholomew

 

Let's try another one. "The Lord is my shepherd..." Does God have sheep (literally and in keeping with the context of the parable)?

 

No, but if you read Keller's "A Shepherd Looks at the 23rd Psalm" you will know a lot more about the Lord and the way He works with us than you did before you read it!

Metaphorical language generally incorporates different grammar than narrative language does in Hebrew. It is fairly easy to see, whether in English or another language, what is being presented as metaphorical.

 

Keller's book does explain this a great deal, but I get the feeling that sometimes he is grasping for meaning to fill pages. Good book though.