A lesson in Narrative Biblical Observation

originally posted by: peppycat
I can't make the image much bigger, so all I see is building with hole in wall and I vaguely see the people (eyesight problem). I was interested in what ever you have to teach, but then it dawned on me... Discernment is a blessing from God, not something you can teach. God blesses some people with the ability to properly interpret the bible and through the grace of God, persons of faith can discern what is true when they read or hear it.

Ergo: it cannot be taught...and if this is so, how would anyone know it to be the fabled discernment?...spaghetti upon spaghetti upon spaghetti...

Å99

a reply to: akushla99 Faith is very mysterious and not easily explained to those without it.

originally posted by: peppycat
a reply to: akushla99 Faith is very mysterious and not easily explained to those without it.

Of course it is, of course it is...

We're not talking about 'faith' though, are we?

'Discernment' falls into the same weasel lexicon as the phrase 'God works in mysterious ways' - when in doubt, have no answer of your own...give a platitudunous mot...

...of course it is...lol

Å99

The house is populated by either friends and family members, or exclusively a single family unit. It is a peaceful, natural scene of domestic life and daily living. Common through all ages of humanity and it's various advancements, to the exclusion of political and the bourgeois seeing as how many of them become obsessed with absurdities much to the disdain of forward moving practicalities or widespread sustainable living for the common man/woman when it comes to such domestic concerns.

Such types have their place in the Greater Work, or course, please make no mistake of that as to their part...for that discussion is another time in another space in another thread entirely...for now, let's keep it simple.

Chop wood, carry water.

I SEE:

Two men are sitting on carpets on the roof engaged in conversation.

Two men are seated under the awning on the second level - also, engaged in conversation.

Two women on the second story are in discussion while the third watches over and plays with the children.

A woman is walking down the stairs with what may either be water or oil.

Animals are feeding and watering themselves.
A group is engaged in a social activity on the bottom floor.

Outside, a woman is going up the stairs, two women are weaving, a shepherd is tending his flock and one person is preparing the bread while another stokes and tends the cooking fires.

A guest or member of the household is leaving through the front door.

That's visual verification.

Allegory and the story behind the facts, well, we'd be here fighting over the embellishments and interpretations forever and BOOM TADA - the very reason we have religious study groups weighing perspectives in regards to the written word and stories of the Bible and other Holy Books.

Everyone sees what they see.

No one can dispute the facts inherent in the scene, but they can, and often will distort the meaning and argue over details.

It's rather telling of breeding and education, perspective, bias, as well as baseline personality, but that's neither here nor there.

I could have been obscure but felt it best to be direct so as not to waste time fiddling with tricks of language and go-nowhere mind games and philosophic egotistical self-grandeur as I do not always find such pandering to be in the relative interest of matters such as these, unlike others.

I enjoyed this test very much.
Thank you.

a reply to: GENERAL EYES
Great Job.

Your first paragraph could not truly be verified just from the picture so it is a opionated narrative. It may all be true but you can't gather that from just the picture.

The rest of your observations to your visual verification statement were excellent you were able to see just what could be seen and added nothing to it. that is how we are to look at Bible verses too.

The idea of observation is to keep it in context you did very well in keeping your observation in context.

The rest of the paragraphs may prove to have allegory, figures of speech and other valid points but that comes from more observation and fact finding.

It is observation first, Interpretation second and lastly Application. The study I hold seminars are called inductive Bible Study workshops the first one is a study in narratives. that is where this picture comes from. IN the first we learn Observation, Interpretation and Application of narrative texts.

The rest of the studies are on different type of literature found in the Bible. Like Poetry, Wisdom, Prophecy, Proverbs, Parables and Epistles.

triple thumbs up you're awesome.

a reply to: peppycat

Peppy if you want to give it a try left click on the picture of the house and click view image and it should open it in a larger window.

make your observations then click out and post your ideas.

Yes as a believer we are given the gift of Discernment.

have fun

a reply to: Lazarus Short

It is an exercise in Observation it shows that often we will interpret what we see without first looking at what it is in context.

Basically people will add to what they see. You can't add to what is really there. For example one person in one of our classes said the shepherd was a dirty old man looking at the young girls. There is no way she could know that from looking at the picture. she interpreted what she saw but there is no way to support her interpretation from the picture.

a reply to: ChesterJohn As soon as I can get on a regular computer, I'll be able to left click and actually make out the image. Can't wait to see it!

a reply to: ChesterJohn

"It is an exercise in Observation it shows that often we will interpret what we see without first looking at what it is in context."

But the little golden book is not a 'picture'...and the brain processes images 60,000 times faster than it does text, so the 'observation' palaver would work quite well when trying to observe a 'picture' drawn by Gods hand - copied, translated and reinterpreted a coupla hundred times - and even then, you'd be struggling to faithfully reproduce the nuances visually...i.e. there are no pictures in the christian bible

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

One, It is an exercise only

Two, God is able to preserve his word as promised to every generation (Ps 12:6.7) It is up to you and I to find it. Then believe it and study it in the way his word says to.

See GE, post he did an excellent job. He observed without adding any interpretation to it.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: akushla99

One, It is an exercise only

Two, God is able to preserve his word as promised to every generation (Ps 12:6.7) It is up to you and I to find it. Then believe it and study it in the way his word says to.

See GE, post he did an excellent job. He observed without adding any interpretation to it.

Yes. It is only an exercise in visual observation. It has nothing to do with the way text is processed...as interesting and fun as it is - and the christian bible is a book, cover to cover, of text...no God-preserved pics at all...

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

Text is nothing more that words that create a picture.

it is a step in understanding that one cannot add to what one sees unless it is in the picture. The same with text one cannot add to the text what is not in the context.

CONTEXT noun
1. the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect:
You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.
2. the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.

Often people misunderstand a text because they take it out of Context. The picture exercise show how easy it is to do so.

God preserved his words in Narrative (which are word pictures of history and facts). His words are preserved in other forms of literature as well. But we are just dealing with narratives and they are picture stories made of words.

Ever hear that a picture is worth a thousand words?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: MamaJ

I have already done this exercise in 1994 and have been a certified Inductive Bible Study leader since 1999.

It is a depiction of a Palestinian Home during the time of Christ.

The exercise is to show how he observe. For example one remarked he saw two guys toking it up. Well the problem is there is no way for him to know what they are doing so he added his interpretation to it without all the facts.

This in essence is what many do when they got o the Bible texts. they don't study out the context and ask questions when they observe. They observe and give opinions,

No offense, but that's exactly what you asked people to do. I wouldn't have minded playing along with this, but there was nothing to say.

Clearly it's a building with people. There are animals walking around, apparently on good terms with the people, and people working on different tasks. Everyone has their heads covered so it's a little hard to see gender, though it appears the women aren't outside. There isn't much of what could be called "technology", other than the barest of basics.

So what are you getting at? Everything I just typed is so obvious that it's hard to take your request seriously without more details in your questioning. It's like me posting a picture of an orange, asking what they see, then getting annoyed that people joke around. If I showed the orange, said it represented society, then asked what people see, it would get better answers.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: akushla99

Text is nothing more that words that create a picture.

it is a step in understanding that one cannot add to what one sees unless it is in the picture. The same with text one cannot add to the text what is not in the context.

CONTEXT noun
1. the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect:
You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.
2. the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.

Often people misunderstand a text because they take it out of Context. The picture exercise show how easy it is to do so.

God preserved his words in Narrative (which are word pictures of history and facts). His words are preserved in other forms of literature as well. But we are just dealing with narratives and they are picture stories made of words.

Ever hear that a picture is worth a thousand words?

Yes...a picture, not text.

As entertaining and mind-blowing as it is to you, OP deals in visual, not text - they are processed differently - so trying to use one to prove a point for the other is silly...they are not the same, whichever way you choose to impress it. A 'word-picture' changes when any number of literary devices are altered - similarly, an actual reproduction indistinguishable from the original mona lisa has not been forthcoming - the christian bible is layer upon layer of reproduction despite the fey claim that it is produced, preserved and copied by the hand of God.

Everyone's welcome to believe what they want - but regards the OP, the analogy is particularly clumsy...

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

Narrative text create pictures in ones mind. It is important to keep those pictures in context just like when viewing a real picture.

A majority of the text of the Bible is Narrative.

originally posted by: akushla99
...

Yes...a picture, not text.

As entertaining and mind-blowing as it is to you, OP deals in visual, not text - they are processed differently - so trying to use one to prove a point for the other is silly...they are not the same, whichever way you choose to impress it. A 'word-picture' changes when any number of literary devices are altered - similarly, an actual reproduction indistinguishable from the original mona lisa has not been forthcoming - the christian bible is layer upon layer of reproduction despite the fey claim that it is produced, preserved and copied by the hand of God.

Everyone's welcome to believe what they want - but regards the OP, the analogy is particularly clumsy...

Å99

Yes it is the common unethical practice of those with an agenda called moving the goal post.It's purpose is to "attempt" to belittle and humiliate not help or clarify.The practitioner feels justified in their manipulation because they believe they are self righteous and the other person is wrong without attempting an honest dialogue.It's an endless game of one upmanship by shifting the rules according to their liking.

The OP premise has zero merit so it instigated a tactic to prove others wrong instead of providing any evidence or proof they are correct.It is the foundation for intellectual dishonesty.Instead of having a dialectic the OP"s chooses to volley quotes from a book they don't understand because they are blind to what they are doing.The only reasonable thing to do is to deny their abundant ignorance and then ignore what they have to say because it is only empty religious rhetoric.

Unfortunately I am positive they will continue to spew their religious self righteousness and look down their nose at everyone that disagrees with them instead of the reasonable action of pleading Mea Culpa because they clearly have no idea what they are writing about.This kind of proselytizing always causes more ignorance on the perpetrator and the victim(those who listen).The upside is thank God for ATS where they have made a permanent public record of their ignorance to be denied.To quote another common phrase.You can't hide from yourself... or the truth.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

"apparently they are on good terms" is easy to say but you can not gather that 100% from the picture, there are women outside. We did say it was a Palestine house at the time of Christ. the cut away is so you can see inside.

The idea is to show how easy it is to add to something without proof.

For example one person said the men on the top of the building are "toking out" but there is no way to prove that. Some would say they are discussing a financial deal. Again we could not say that for sure.

If you showed a picture of an orange and said it represented society how would you prove that from the picture of an orange?

I was hoping to go to the next exercise. but after reading the majority of the reply posts I will stop here.

Those who wish to continue please PM me and we will do it via PM

a reply to: GENERAL EYES

now tell us who they would vote for, based on the description you just provided.

also, mr chester, maybe you could elaborate on that "interpretation" bit. seems thats where most of the trouble is. how would you intepret the image according to those observations? and how would you prove it beyond a doubt?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

the cut away is so you can see inside.

How do you know that? Aren't you making an assumption about the artist, rather than simply observing the picture?

We have no idea why there's holes in the walls and the roof. Maybe it was made that way on purpose. Maybe, we're looking at a structure after the Roman's came through with ramming rods and catapults.

Assumption, making an ass of u & mption.......