Christian business owners . . .

[giblets]

Also Tolkien was wrong - there were **** loads of allegory in his books regardless of what he may have said publically. Once you release a work into the world, it stops being "yours".

Seriously?

Okay, I think the poem Jabberwocky is an allegory about WWII. Obviously the Jabberwock is Hitler and Stalin is a Jubjub bird. Mussolini is a Bundersnatch. The poem doesn't belong to Lewis Carroll so my opinion is totally valid. The fact that he died long before the war ever happened and obviously had the idea before the war took place is irrelevant.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Seriously?

Yes, seriously. Once you release it, it's the world's - the readers as well as the author. The author doesn't have control over what people think of it anymore.

Okay, I think the poem Jabberwocky is an allegory about WWII. Obviously the Jabberwock is Hitler and Stalin is a Jubjub bird. Mussolini is a Bundersnatch. The poem doesn't belong to Lewis Carroll so my opinion is totally valid. The fact that he died long before the war ever happened and obviously had the idea before the war took place is irrelevant.

Now prove this in detail and get others to believe it, after reviewing your detailed work, and you may be onto something .

(you missed the whole part where I think the 'everyone is an expert' thing is total BS)

[giblets]

Yes, seriously. Once you release it, it's the world's - the readers as well as the author. The author doesn't have control over what people think of it anymore.

The author can't force you to interpret the book in a way that even vaguely resembles the author's intention, but that doesn't mean your head canon is actually a part of the book. I could insist Frodo and Sam are gay lovers and comb the text for evidence, doesn't make it true.

Now prove this in detail and get others to believe it, after reviewing your detailed work, and you may be onto something .

(you missed the whole part where I think the 'everyone is an expert' thing is total BS)

Does this apply to the Bible? The Bible says whatever a group of people believe it says?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Does this apply to the Bible? The Bible says whatever a group of people believe it says?

That's exactly where this conversation arises from - YES, scholarly and historical readings of Scripture are how to properly do exegesis! People can come up with whatever weird stuff from Scripture they want, but that doesn't put it on any equal footing with those who have studied the text and historical context.

Rah, disagreed with Elok's original point, saying that anyone's interpretation of Scripture is as good as any one else's.

[giblets]

That's exactly where this conversation arises from - YES, scholarly and historical readings of Scripture are how to properly do exegesis! People can come up with whatever weird stuff from Scripture they want, but that doesn't put it on any equal footing with those who have studied the text and historical context.

Rah, disagreed with Elok's original point, saying that anyone's interpretation of Scripture is as good as any one else's.

But you're claiming the Bible doesn't belong to the original authors...?

[rah]

Anti-intellectualism in spades (there is a reason Kidicious thanked you for this post). People don't really know anything about technique or meaning - at some level people have their own judgement about the merits of art, but their judgement do not carry equal weight. Folks who say that Thomas Kincade is just as good an artist as Jackson Pollack have made their own judgement, but they are just wrong on the merits of the artist and the art. Knowledge of art allows folks to look at things in a deeper, more informed way.

You can believe in whatever anti-intellectual balderdash you want - I'll just laugh at you.

Every one an expert, pfft!

I'm required to like a piece of art because an expert tells me it's good. Pfft.
I remember when they were taking pictures made from apes and there were some art experts praising how great they were and what insight they showed. Pfft.

Now I'm not saying it has no value. Philosophy can help man advance in certain areas.
But my big issue is that a lot of the social sciences have been used to perpetuate the class system in the US.

If you were at a dinner party and you knew a few of the great philosophers, it was assumed that you went to college and had joined the club.
If you didn't people looked down their nose at you. Very similar to how you're reacting to my current point of view.
I'm not saying that there is no value in this knowledge or that they MAY have some insights but not to the degree that you seem to attribute to it.
As pointed out take Ben as an example. He teaches History but has proven over an over that he usually has no idea what he's talking about.

I had a LAS political science major and a computer science major. I've seen both sides. I saw a lot of crap on the academic side. Quite a few of my so called professors were full of it, and themselves. I chose to make a living off the harder science.

Again, I'm not saying it doesn't have it's place, but refuse to bow down to it like you do. A lot of it is agreed upon theories used to make them feel superior.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But you're claiming the Bible doesn't belong to the original authors...?

Of course it doesn't belong to them. The Bible is a living document (if you will), to be interpreted by God's people over and over again - heck, the New Testament was basically a re-interpretation of the Old Testament after the revelation of Jesus.

[giblets]

Of course it doesn't belong to them. The Bible is a living document (if you will), to be interpreted by God's people over and over again - heck, the New Testament was basically a re-interpretation of the Old Testament after the revelation of Jesus.

But did Paul et. al claim that their ideas were actually part of the Old Testament?

[Kidlicious]

Anti-intellectualism in spades (there is a reason Kidicious thanked you for this post). People don't really know anything about technique or meaning - at some level people have their own judgement about the merits of art, but their judgement do not carry equal weight. Folks who say that Thomas Kincade is just as good an artist as Jackson Pollack have made their own judgement, but they are just wrong on the merits of the artist and the art. Knowledge of art allows folks to look at things in a deeper, more informed way.

You can believe in whatever anti-intellectual balderdash you want - I'll just laugh at you.

Every one an expert, pfft!

You don't have to take any courses to appreciate good art. Being able to appreciate good art is something that you are either born with, or you aren't. But you can take courses to learn how to talk like you appreciate good art. That's fake though.

[N35t0r]

That's exactly where this conversation arises from - YES, scholarly and historical readings of Scripture are how to properly do exegesis! People can come up with whatever weird stuff from Scripture they want, but that doesn't put it on any equal footing with those who have studied the text and historical context.

Rah, disagreed with Elok's original point, saying that anyone's interpretation of Scripture is as good as any one else's.

My quip with this is that 90% of these 'scholarly readings' are made by people with an agenda to push...

[Imran Siddiqui]

But did Paul et. al claim that their ideas were actually part of the Old Testament?

Yes, a reinterpretation of Scripture doesn't mean that you don't still hold to what was written in Scripture. You are just interpreting the text in a new and fresh way.

[Imran Siddiqui]

My quip with this is that 90% of these 'scholarly readings' are made by people with an agenda to push...

So read many different schools of scholarship and decide that way.

[Ben Kenobi]

Christians spread the Gospel, not just Apostles. What are the verses that you are referring to?

The church wasn't a collection of socialists where everyone had equal authority. The Apostles are all throughout Acts, and they spread the Gospel initially, at Pentecost, and then travelled to all parts of the Church. They had special authority vested in them by Christ.

You really need to read your New Testament. Special knowledge available to the elect is a heresy.

[Ben Kenobi]

But did Paul et. al claim that their ideas were actually part of the Old Testament?

Jesus claimed that his ideas were a fulfillment of the Old Testament. Hebrews talks about this - how the sacrifices have been replaced, with the Passover Lamb, who gave his life as a sacrifice for many.

[Ben Kenobi]

Every one an expert, pfft!

I think it's hilarious how similar our beliefs are, and yet you reject Magisterial authority.