Fifth Blog Question: Response
Just so we’re clear, this entry is in response to Shannie’s entry written on Sunday, November 5 in her response to an atheist friend.
“The way the Bible was written makes the reader stop and try to understand what message is trying to be conveyed. The language used often leaves room for interpretation. It’s not always clear cut and easy to see; redactors used showing versus telling in the Bible. The way they change it from book to book, chapter to chapter can make the “clear lines” of the Bible a little fuzzier.”
I appreciate and agree with the fact that she focuses so much on the language of the Bible in this post. The sparseness of language seems to be one of the most constant and consistent features of the Bible, in both Old Testament and New. Interpretation varies from person to person, and the argument about who’s right and wrong will never be settled, considering the only people who know for sure are the writers and redactors themselves.
Jacob is a great Old Testament example of the sparseness of the text. Another fabulous example would be the gospel of Mark in the New Testament. He tends to let the actions he writes about speak for themselves. He does not describe the appearance of Jesus and claim his divination, nor does he reveal whether he is an eyewitness of what has happened. He does not state whether Jesus or the people listening to him understand who he is. He tells us that Jesus is the son of God, but never whether he is divine or not.
What Marks gives us is his actions, what he does, the miracle he performs and the story of Jesus’ death and resurrection. Whether he was so sparse because he didn’t have more information or because he was there to answer people’s questions himself is unclear. It could very well be that he was sparse because he believed Jesus was divine, the long-awaited “Messiah,” and like the Old Testament writers wrote sparsely in respect to his divinity. We just don’t have any way of knowing for sure.
Shannie is so right when she says that the lines in the Bible are “fuzzy.” It is part of what makes it so intriguing, so interesting to study.
Just so we’re clear, this entry is in response to Shannie’s entry written on Sunday, November 5 in her response to an atheist friend.
“The way the Bible was written makes the reader stop and try to understand what message is trying to be conveyed. The language used often leaves room for interpretation. It’s not always clear cut and easy to see; redactors used showing versus telling in the Bible. The way they change it from book to book, chapter to chapter can make the “clear lines” of the Bible a little fuzzier.”
I appreciate and agree with the fact that she focuses so much on the language of the Bible in this post. The sparseness of language seems to be one of the most constant and consistent features of the Bible, in both Old Testament and New. Interpretation varies from person to person, and the argument about who’s right and wrong will never be settled, considering the only people who know for sure are the writers and redactors themselves.
Jacob is a great Old Testament example of the sparseness of the text. Another fabulous example would be the gospel of Mark in the New Testament. He tends to let the actions he writes about speak for themselves. He does not describe the appearance of Jesus and claim his divination, nor does he reveal whether he is an eyewitness of what has happened. He does not state whether Jesus or the people listening to him understand who he is. He tells us that Jesus is the son of God, but never whether he is divine or not.
What Marks gives us is his actions, what he does, the miracle he performs and the story of Jesus’ death and resurrection. Whether he was so sparse because he didn’t have more information or because he was there to answer people’s questions himself is unclear. It could very well be that he was sparse because he believed Jesus was divine, the long-awaited “Messiah,” and like the Old Testament writers wrote sparsely in respect to his divinity. We just don’t have any way of knowing for sure.
Shannie is so right when she says that the lines in the Bible are “fuzzy.” It is part of what makes it so intriguing, so interesting to study.
posted by Kimmy at 8:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home