artsylady Posted May 24, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 171 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,813 Content Per Day: 0.64 Reputation: 150 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/26/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 24, 2004 Definition (from Cambridge online dictionary) literal [show phonetics] adjective The literal meaning of a word is its original, basic meaning: The literal meaning of 'television' is 'seeing from a distance'. You need to demonstrate to the examiners that you have more than a literal understanding of the text. Her translation is too literal (= done one word at a time), resulting in heavy, unnatural prose. Compare figurative (LANGUAGE). literally [show phonetics] adverb having the real or original meaning of a word or phrase: They were responsible for literally millions of deaths. We live literally just round the corner from her. You'll lose marks if you translate too literally (= one word at a time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artsylady Posted May 24, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 171 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,813 Content Per Day: 0.64 Reputation: 150 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/26/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 24, 2004 Compare LITERAL with FIGURATIVE (from Cambridge online dictionary) figurative (LANGUAGE) [show phonetics] adjective (of words and phrases) used not with their basic meaning but with a more imaginative meaning:Of course, she was using the term 'massacre' in the figurative sense. Compare literal. figuratively [show phonetics] adverb Figuratively speaking, it was a blow right between the eyes (= it was a bad shock). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artsylady Posted May 24, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 171 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,813 Content Per Day: 0.64 Reputation: 150 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/26/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 24, 2004 To interpret "literally" means to interpret at literature. It means that if something is poetic, it is interpret poetically. I think maybe you mean to interpret literarily. Because to interpret literally, does meant to interpret at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artsylady Posted May 24, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 171 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,813 Content Per Day: 0.64 Reputation: 150 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/26/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 24, 2004 The seventh day after creation is not spoken of having a beginning or ending. It does not mention "evening to morning." Therefore it speaks of eternity. I pointed that out in my previous post. I guess you did not read it close enough. Did the seventh day, come after the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth days? Again, why do you think the writer also mentions "evening" and "darkness"? What do you those represent, if you think the writer is using these words figuratively? As well, in the commandment to rest on the 7th DAY, does the writer use the literal term 'day' in one verse, (humans rest on the 7th day) and in the very next verse, use 'day' figuratively (as in God rested on the 7th day)? Most Bible scholars, by far, believe that Genesis was written to be taken literally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artsylady Posted May 24, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 171 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,813 Content Per Day: 0.64 Reputation: 150 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/26/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 24, 2004 Genesis 5 1Â This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2Â Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. 3Â And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth: 4Â And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: 5Â And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. Adam's age given in Genesis 5:3,5. Clearly, he lived after the beginning of the 7th day. This is the age of Adam from when he was created on the 6th day. If day six lasted say, one million years, then either Adam really lived to be the ripe old age of 1,000, 130 years. But then again, how would anyone know how long he really lived because you think 'day' is used figuratively and really means long time period. In any case, reasoning that 'day' is anything other than a real literal day, then these verses above are wrong. In Hebrew, the word day means 'day', as we know it. Why didn't they use a different word like 'period' or 'time period'? Using the word day literally leaves no problems with other verses in the Bible. It fits. Your interpretation does not fit with the rest of the Bible, but does fit with the consensus of modern scientists. My interpretation fits with the Bible, but doesn't necessarily fit with the consensis of modern scientists. Big deal. I can easily live with that. Especially knowing there are MANY scientists who believe the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest matthew517 Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 If it were a day it was a day. If God could make Adam an adult upon his creation then why couldn't He make the earth old as well? What I see as the dilemma between Gods Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bread_of_Life Posted May 24, 2004 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 22 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 872 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/17/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/24/1981 Share Posted May 24, 2004 Arkon, Have you ever thought that when your argument descends to the point of "don't listen to him, he's an atheist", that it might not be worth the bother actually writing it out and putting it up on the boards? Matthew517, #1 . Man said the earth was flat. It Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest arkon Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 Have you ever thought that when your argument descends to the point of "don't listen to him, he's an atheist", that it might not be worth the bother actually writing it out and putting it up on the boards? No. artsylady, Anyone who is not convinced now, does not want to know the truth. You are blessed with patience beyone human understanding Well done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bread_of_Life Posted May 24, 2004 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 22 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 872 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/17/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/24/1981 Share Posted May 24, 2004 I didn't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted May 25, 2004 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 86 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 624 Content Per Day: 0.08 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/20/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2004 Anyone who is not convinced now, does not want to know the truth. Don't look at it, maybe it'll go away! Rofl. I think almost anyone reasonable can see the fallacy in this argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts