Timeline for Does Judaism have a concept of holy text literalism?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 8, 2023 at 16:55 | comment | added | Nic | @RabbiKaii Made a small change. Hopefully this clarifies things. | |
| Aug 8, 2023 at 16:53 | history | edited | Nic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 16 characters in body
|
| Aug 8, 2023 at 16:52 | comment | added | Nic | I guess "literal word of god" is confusing, because the word literal is overloaded. Probably "word of god exactly as said" is a better phrasing. | |
| Aug 7, 2023 at 9:42 | comment | added | Rabbi Kaii | Note you have taken 2 extremes in this answer (and I don't know how to resolve them). The first extreme is the word "literal". The second extreme is the word "metaphorical". Literal implies NOT metaphorical. Literal also implies that Hashem literally has a flesh and bones hand/eye etc ch'v. Sorry to be pedantic about words, I really wish we had an easy way to explain this in english. Calling the Torah true, is probably best. Metaphor is incorrect because Hashem does have a hand, but it is not physical (Shaarei Orah Hakdama 6), so literal is incorrect too. | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 18:40 | comment | added | mevaqesh |
this is completely in line with his understanding of (e.g.) the story of Creation in his "Guide to the Perplexed", source?
|
|
| Mar 24, 2015 at 11:52 | comment | added | Nic | I meant that G-d wrote those exact words (hence "word of g-d", no mistakes possible), but that the laws of Judaism are not derived from their literal meaning, but rather through careful interpretations that come from an oral tradition. Does this clarify things? | |
| Mar 24, 2015 at 3:29 | comment | added | msh210♦ | "the Torah is the literal Word of G-d" seems to be contradicted by "laws... do not however come from reading the text literally". Unless you mean that it's meant literally but we don't get our laws that way? | |
| Mar 23, 2015 at 20:11 | history | edited | Nic | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Mar 23, 2015 at 18:10 | comment | added | WAF | +1 for tipping the iceberg of complexity with the "Final note". | |
| Mar 23, 2015 at 15:10 | comment | added | Nic | I guess my issue is that there are biblical commandments that are explicitly affected by human values/science and so some aspects of those commandments can potentially change. Hard for me to come up with a really good example right now, but something like Avoda Zara depends on if the object is actually actively worshiped, so an action that used to be prohibited might now be ok (or vice versa).... This is not a great example, but was my rational for adding the word "core". | |
| Mar 23, 2015 at 14:57 | comment | added | Daniel | Nice answer (+1), but what exactly are you referring to when you mention "core interpretation of the Torah"? | |
| Mar 23, 2015 at 14:33 | history | answered | Nic | CC BY-SA 3.0 |