tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post116738531969260573..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Picking up the piecesRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1167416568825505872006-12-29T13:22:00.000-05:002006-12-29T13:22:00.000-05:00In Galatians, Paul does not interpret the *entire ...In Galatians, Paul does not interpret the *entire narrative* of that section of Genesis as an allegory. Rather, he lifts out certain elements and treats them as allegory, and he does so under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Touchstone, without inspiration, is taking an entire narrative and treating it as an allegory from beginning to end.<BR/><BR/>So, in that case, in detail, what *exactly* do these alleged symbols in the text of the creation and fall accounts, and, for that matter the section up to the end of the Antediluvian era actually represent? Is Eve an allegory of the Ark of the Covenant and Mary? That's a typical allegorical interpretation of Eve. Would he agree to this? If not, why not? That's the problem with allegorical interpretation apart from Scripture; you can make it say just about anything. Touchstone would be at home with the Quadriga in the Middle Ages, but we all know that offends his scientific sensibilities. <BR/><BR/>I've asked this before, and received no real answer. What *in this text* signals that this text is to be taken as an "allegory." Where is the literary warrant? What constitutes the form of an "allegory" in Hebrew writing? Where are those elements present in *this* text?<BR/><BR/>Scripture interprets Scripture. Where does *Scripture* treat the text as an allegory? For that matter, Paul wrote Galatians under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Touchstone is many things, but under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is certainly not one of them. There is a marked difference between *Paul* and thus *Scripture* interpreting *elements* of a *particular* narrative as allegory and treating an *entire section* of Genesis as an allegory *without Scriptural warrant* and *apart from* inspiration. This tells us far more about Touchstone's view of Scripture than it does the text he is attempting to interpret.GeneMBridgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504383610477532374noreply@blogger.com