[OnyxCougar]

OK, this is a case of Eisegesis and Exegesis.

The Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary defines ‘eisegesis’ as: an interpretation, esp. of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter’s own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text.

Thus, when someone reads something into Scripture—this would be an example of eisegesis. For instance, nowhere does the Bible ever speak of billions of years. In Genesis 1, the word day (yôm) in context, as used for the six days of creation (with a number and the phrase evening and morning), means these days are ordinary approximately 24-hour periods—ordinary days.

However, probably the majority of church leaders insist these days could represent billions of years—this is ‘eisegesis’, as the billions of years is a belief from outside of Scripture that is read into Scripture (resulting in the clear words of Scripture being reinterpreted on the basis of these outside ideas).

**********

The Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary defines ‘exegesis’ as: critical explanation or interpretation of a text or portion of a text, esp. of the Bible.

This is often called the ‘grammatical-historical’ interpretation method.

Thus, when someone reads the words of Scripture, and interprets them on the basis of context and the type of literature etc., then this would be an example of ‘exegesis’—reading out of Scripture what the writer clearly intended to express.

In Genesis 1, the Hebrew word for day (yôm), as used for each of the six Days of Creation, would be looked at in regard to context and the type of literature. Genesis is written in typical Jewish historical narrative—this is important to understand when interpreting the words of this book. Any reputable Hebrew lexicon (one-way dictionary) will list the different meanings given to a word (like ‘day’), and the various contexts that determine these meanings.

One will find that whenever the yôm (day) is qualified by a number or the phrase evening and morning, it always means an ordinary day. Thus, critically looking at the text and then reading out of Scripture, one cannot come to any other conclusion except that these days were ordinary (24-hour) days.

If one consistently applies this same method of interpretation throughout the Scriptures, one would have no problem accepting the Virginal Conception and the literal bodily Resurrection of Christ. Such teachings come only from the revelation of Scripture—the words of the Bible taken in context according to the type of literature. This results in believing the words of Scripture, not doubting them, thus providing the basis for the Christian faith.

In addition:

Most scholars agree that the bible is written or edited by different people. So, what if the Mosaic books (the Septuagint, or the first 5 books of the bible, edited or written by Moses) were meant to be taken literally? Does that negate Jesus' parables? Jesus told parables, and therefore ALL of the bible, old and new testament must be interpreted, and not taken as literal truths? That doesn't make sense.

Lets extend your idea to non-religious, fictitious works, for a moment. I'll use the Belgariad by David Eddings as an example.

It opens with the telling of Garion's childhood and events that follow. Then the storyteller (Old Wolf) comes to the farm and tells the story of the creation of the Orb of Aldur and Torak One-Eye. We later find out the Old Wolf is Belgarath, an ancient sorceror, hand chosen by the God Aldur. Belgarath tells many parables and stories throught the next twelve books to illustrate some point or another. Does that make the beginning of the book, the part about Faldor's farm, open to interpretation simply because Belgarath told some parables?

Substitute Genesis for Faldor's Farm and Jesus for Belgarath, and it's much the same thing.

Mostly, I think it's context. In the other thread, I brought up the different translations and how it could be rape or coersion, depending on the translation. It's very much about the Hebrew and Greek and how you translate the words. In context for a fuller understanding? Wouldn't that be the best way to go?

I have an "amplified" bible, that has about a ton of footnotes in it, where the Hebrew is open to different meanings. It also says yom is day, when used with numbers and time of day.