A lesson in Narrative Biblical Observation

a reply to: windword

Yes it was drawn that way for a purpose. You see I drew the picture almost 20 years ago for the workbook.

This is why I will stop this thread.

no one participates just belittlements and nonsense.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: windword

Yes it was drawn that way for a purpose. You see I drew the picture almost 20 years ago for the workbook.

This is why I will stop this thread.

no one participates just belittlements and nonsense.

'

Okay, so YOU drew the picture as an example that you could use in your teachings about interpreting the Bible. The only problem with this example then, is that YOU didn't write/draw the Bible, yet here you are supposing to teach us how to interpret something that you DIDN'T write/draw.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
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?

At no point did you say it was a house in Palestine at the time of Christ. You probably based your drawing on reading a text. Yes a picture tells a thousand words so why are you denying us our thousand words. Also are you admitting Palestine existed at the time of Christ. Also have you learnt to read Hebrew and the Hebrew that was written 2000 years ago as I bet the English version of the bible is a lot different than the original story and the English version that you read now is different from the first translation into English. I would be interested in your next exercise even tho most of us are having fun you too can laugh at us heathens and how we will not go to your special place in your sky.
Keep it coming.
Peace love and mung beans
Ok I admit you did say where the house was and what time it was but not in your original post.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
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.

I should have said in my earlier post: Some people have the ability to see what they are looking at, and some don't. Let me know if you learn this fact. Yes, and some people insert their own biases into what they see.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: windword

Yes it was drawn that way for a purpose. You see I drew the picture almost 20 years ago for the workbook.

This is why I will stop this thread.

no one participates just belittlements and nonsense.

You have 3500+ posts, and did not expect "just belittlements and nonsense"? Have you not been paying attention?? Listen up - this site is heavily biased toward skeptics, cynics, and argumentative a$$holes. /end rant/

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
This is why I will stop this thread....no one participates just belittlements and nonsense.

I just finished going through the thread and I totally agree with you.

I was amazed at the amount of childish stupidity in so many of the posts.

What I find so sad about these responses is that your posts are some of the best writing on ATS.

I was very interested in your thoughts on this topic so I will be one of those sending you a U2U.

Just know that some of us here really appreciate the time you put into this...

BTW, for those of you who have asked me why I have never started a thread on ATS, here's your answer...

a reply to: ChesterJohn

"no one participates just belittlements and nonsense."

That's rich.

Your point is clear, your example does not fit the comparison you are making. It has been remarked that this is a flaw based on what the brain does with images - there is no comparison that can be made, other than with an actual image - 'pictures' in the brain imaged by reading words follows a different and far more complicated set of processes.

And if you thought the eyes could be tricked by its processes - just imagine what trickery the 'imagined' image from reading words can produce...we read about it on these boards all the time: people forming grotesque images in thier mind from what they have either been told, or read in a book, namely the little golden one.

At best, the Mona Lisa still ostensibly looks as it did without too much restoration work - but there IS only one Mona Lisa...not dozens of 'versions' which are all purported to be from the hand of the one creator...that would be halfway easy, spend half your life devoted to perfecting the DaVinci brushstroke, produce a raft of DaVinci-ish paintings and claim you are channeling DaVinci himself - no-one would be the wiser...

The OP point being made does not explain the effect of read words, but seen images...they are different.

Å99

a reply to: Murgatroid

Are you belittleling my posts. Without clear. Instructions in the opening post how can I give the answer the op wanted . just because my post did not give the answer the op wanted does not mean I was being childish or belittleling. I am not trained to teach and just wrote what I observed not knowing all is what makes me great. I think that when you read something if you are feeling defensive your brain thinks it knows in what tone the text is written. It is very hard to tell what tone the comment is written. For example I could say NO to you in a quiet voice or I could say it with rage in my eyes and yell it but if I send you a text on the phone how are you to know which tone I am using. Perhaps the op had learnt something by this exercise which is to give more clearer instructions and not to expect the exact answer that he is seeking all the time after all we are not one brain we are individuals with our own opinions.

a reply to: Cloudbuster

No, actually your first post was one of the few worth reading.

Like you mentioned, you posted what you observed.

If others had done the same, it would have probably made for an awesome thread.

Sadly, intelligent discussion appears to be a thing of the past.

originally posted by: Murgatroid
a reply to: Cloudbuster

No, actually your first post was one of the few worth reading.

Like you mentioned, you posted what you observed.

If others had done the same, it would have probably made for an awesome thread.

Sadly, intelligent discussion appears to be a thing of the past.

Correction: It would have been an awesome thread if the OP had recognised the silliness of using the visual as a comparison to the textual...specifically as it applies to the way the brain processes said information. Continuing to aver that ignorance is key to discussing the OP - but if anyone wants to get torn over that, that's their prerogative - just calling it unintelligent discussion is being intellectually dishonest.

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

Accusing others of silliness and unintelligent discussion while doing exactly that...

originally posted by: akushla99
Is this picture the 'Drawing of God'?

Before you are so quick to judge make sure that your own pot is free from any soot before you bring the kettle into the mix.

originally posted by: Murgatroid
a reply to: akushla99

Accusing others of silliness and unintelligent discussion while doing exactly that...

originally posted by: akushla99
Is this picture the 'Drawing of God'?

Before you are so quick to judge make sure that your own pot is free from any soot before you bring the kettle into the mix.

Follow that original post of mine - a legitimate question in relation to my following posts.

As a lesson (re: what OP has postulated) you have failed and you require detention! Haha

You read into it in exactly the way the OP says - seeing things that aren't there, and manufacturing your own interpretation of the gospel according to Å99...I wrote it (and you can take my word for it), the question was a valid one, and I expected to get an intelligent response...sadly, this didn't happen...obviously...

Å99

a reply to: Murgatroid

I think you miss the point.

The Bible is supposedly "the drawing of God". The drawing in the OP was not God's drawing, it was his own drawing. That means that he had knowledge about the drawing that we didn't. But, the OP didn't write the Bible and, therefore, doesn't have any more knowledge about the "drawing of God" than anyone else viewing it.

The OP"s example of teaching lessons to us, on how to interpret the Bible, is indeed silly, and intellectual dishonest to boot!

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Murgatroid

I think you miss the point.

The Bible is supposedly "the drawing of God". The drawing in the OP was not God's drawing, it was his own drawing. That means that he had knowledge about the drawing that we didn't. But, the OP didn't write the Bible and, therefore, doesn't have any more knowledge about the "drawing of God" than anyone else viewing it.

The OP"s example of teaching lessons to us, on how to interpret the Bible, is indeed silly, and intellectual dishonest to boot!

Aaaa...mennnnn

TY

Å99

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Sorry, did we all somehow get signed up for a class for the spring semester, and you're the TA?
Are you intending to compile our responses and present them to your Sunday School students?

First thing I 'observed' was in the instructions section - the Bible does not have 'an author'. It has editors. It is an anthology of ancient literature. That's all.

Second thing: your 'drawing' - it's a multi-unit dwelling with serious safety & health hazards (there's a cow in the front room), but everyone is oblivious to it. Someone needs to keep the sheep out of the bonfire.

ETA:

Oh. Sorry I was late to class, eh? My bad.

Pop quiz: Why do you think ATS is a good venue for your teaching rehearsals?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

You can't "stop this thread."

You may read or ignore the critiques and responses.
IMO, you'd have done better to ask people to draw their OWN version of YOUR text, and see how accurate their pictures turned out to be.

One of the problems I have with literature made into movies, for example, is the director and actors and scenes don't look the same as what I saw in my mind's eye while reading. Very few cinematic or illustrated adaptations of books live up to the intricate world that words create.


Oh. And one more thing - "left clicking" on the drawing doesn't do anything.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Here, try this 'observation' of the Book of Noah:

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

No What I meant was I will stop any further exercises in to observation. The picture was to show how easy it is to interpret without facts.

the next steps get a bit more complicated and an chart would have been posted for others to follow, then we would go forward to read chapter one of the book of Ruth (a short book), and seek to observe the text and answer the Who, What, When, Where, Why, Which and How in separate columns of the chart.

I.e. who are the characters, who is the writing too, Who is doing what and when and where and why and so forth.

Once all that was done we would have a pretty clear idea of what the narrative of Ruth is saying. Once that was done I had hoped to move into Interpretation and word studies and then see what applications we could draw out of our Observation and interpretation part that we could apply to our lives.

It is not about drawing our version it is about seeing what God's version already says and seek what he wants from us.

With limited character space I should have introduced much more and probably did a two page OP to make some things clearer. I have never tried to teach via a forum before, it is my first time. I am used to live audience of people who want to learn how to study the Bible.

Thanks for your reply

a reply to: ChesterJohn

but you still didnt explain how the interpretation process works.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

I have never tried to teach via a forum before, it is my first time. I am used to live audience of people who want to learn how to study the Bible.

Thanks for your reply

You're Welcome.

My education (advanced degree in Humanities) taught me how to examine and interpret literature early on (most high school English classes do that..but undergrad focused classes do it in even more depth), and later how to deconstruct "narratives" given by people so they could get a more objective perspective of their own lives and beliefs. When a person tells their own story, they can be helped to understand HOW they developed their beliefs about their stories (when someone else might interpret it very differently), and they can begin to to let go of the inaccuracies under which they have allowed themselves to "react" or "respond" previously.

sigh. It's complicated. Narrative Therapy. Look it up if you're interested.

(Also, the Bible is not "the word of God." )

Still, you'd do better to find some freshman Christian forum for youths than to try to peddle this stuff on ATS.