Comments on: General Conference October 2012 Review, Saturday Afternoon by Vicky Gilpin

By: miketea

miketea — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:10:01 +0000

I am astonished that you should assert Jesus uses hyperbole rarely. He was fond of this idiom form and used it frequently. Some examples are:

Matt. 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25 A camel going through the eye of a needle

Luke 14:26 To illustrate the point under discussion here

Matt. 5:29 Chopping off “offensive” body parts

Mark 4:31 Faith as a mustard seed

I can only imagine you wrote as you did because it suits you to build up your argument. But, once you realise how common this figure of speech is it becomes obvious whenever it comes up.

By: miketea

miketea — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:49:41 +0000

You seem to be suggesting that once someone has used a metaphor, simile, hyperbole once then everything he says must be interpreted in that way. That is not how the world works. I am not applying a rule of thumb but passing on to you (in your apparent ignorance) how these things are commonly understood among people who take the trouble to understand the culture, language and time of Scripture; that is education.

You are making a controversy where none exists and, I suspect, for the purpose of making mischief. Are we to assume that this example of making mischief is typical and take everything you say as motivated in the same way? Or are we to use judgement to differentiate when you are up to no good and when you are sincere?

By: H Lions

H Lions — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:47:55 +0000

One other thing, using a metaphor or an allegory is not the same as hyperbole, as I earlier pointed out, Jesus is fond of allegory and uses it a lot, hyperbole he uses rarely if at all other than in examples such as John 14 quoted where he combines the one with the other.

By: H Lions

H Lions — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:32:26 +0000

I find it remarkable that someone as obviously educated as you are Miketea, does not know that any text is open to interpretation, close reading and analysis.
Once a case for hyperbole, irony, sarcasm or the presence of an unreliable narrator has been established for one section of a particular text then all other aspects of the said text must also be considered as prone to the same interpretation and must be viewed as potentially written in the same light.
This is education, simply applying “a rule of thumb” as and when it is expedient to your own singular point of view is educationally/intellectually dishonest as I am sure you are aware.
Either all of the words of Jesus in a gospel are potential hyperbole or none of them are, you cannot have it both ways. If they are not hyperbole then they are to be consider as literal.
Since the instances quoted are apparent in more than one of the synoptic gospel, all three must be considered one way or another as either potentially hyperbolic or literally.

For example when Jesus said
“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” in the none synoptic John 14:6 is this literal or allegorical hyperbole?

Well it must be the latter, since no person can literally be an abstract concept such as truth, so therefore all of the words of Jesus must be considered as possibly allegorical since there is a precedent for his use of the device, and therefore no one can lay claim to the idea that anything Jesus is quoted as saying must be literal truth since it is demonstrably not.
It all becomes a matter of opinion.
In this instance you see Jesus as a man making (in any light) a bad taste hyperbolic joke about his being more important to his followers than their own families.
I see him laying the foundations of a hateful cult, one that among Christians (Mormons especially) has destroyed families, caused untold dissent and even caused wars between opposing Christian denomination is a cause for no good what so ever.

By: miketea

miketea — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 20:26:53 +0000

I find it remarkable that anyone should understand perfectly what is hyperbole yet claims it is nigh on impossible to identify it in a text. Or is this a special problem for a secularist reading a particular text? In which case, does the problem lie with the reader rather than the text?

There are good articles on the subject on the internet

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=2407

http://www.tentmaker.org/Biblematters/hyperbole2.htm

By: miketea

miketea — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 20:17:23 +0000

Q. “IF it is hyperbole how can we tell when he is NOT using hyperbole elsewhere?”

A. Education

By: H Lions

H Lions — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:33:15 +0000

Thanks Bob, your good lady did make this quotation in answer to Elder Perry’s comment on eternal families, posing the question “Is this what God wants?” I therefore did think it relevant to point out that going by that quote in the context of the chapter, she is right, God is not interested in families, he wants all the attention and adoration solely (or soul-ey) on himself.
God in fact seems to find relations a distraction to MEN (and this addressed solely to men ) from the more important task of worshiping him, finishing the address by lumping families in with wealth and possessions all of which must be given up to follow the Lord.
Point made, I’ll say no more.

By: H Lions

H Lions — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:25:08 +0000

Simple answer Miketea is that Jesus was not and rarely did indulge in hyperbole, in the rest of the chapter he goes in to detail pointing out that “those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.” Luke 14:33.
Alternately IF it is hyperbole how can we tell when he is NOT using hyperbole elsewhere? Is not the NT is full of examples of Jesus make extreme and radical statements and commandments?

By: miketea

miketea — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 18:32:13 +0000

Great commentary Vicky. You have picked out key points and shone a light into some very dark places. You know what you are talking about and have a charitable way of communicating it.

Oh, Mr Lions, what can I say? You are clever enough to find and explain the original Greek but you haven’t the most basic capacity to understand that Jesus is using hyperbole to make a serious point. These texts are not “preaching hate” as you misrepresent them doing but preaching priorities, as Bobby has clearly explained.

If you have ever “waited an eternity”, died of embarrassment,” “jumped out of your skin” with fright, or been “hungry enough to eat a horse” you have used hyperbole. If, on that basis, you gained a reputation for having lived forever, died, being sans skin or eating horses I am sure you would object.

The Bible is rich with literary allusions and devices and a person intent on finding fault and causing mischief can misrepresent Scripture by treating allegory as history, history as teaching and hyperbole as understatement. I am afraid your agenda is showing.

By: Bobby

Bobby — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:12:13 +0000

Now then Mr Lions long time no chat, I think its safe to say we are not commanded to hate our relatives, the greater context of scripture shows that we are indeed to love our spouse and kids, and respect and obey our parents, there is much biblical material on this as I am sure you well know.

However the call to follow Christ is a call to put Him above ALL else, with no exception, in comparison to the significance of Christ all things fade in significance, this in the bluntest way possible is what is being communicated here.

I appreciate from your more secular perspective this will still not impress you so I am not too interested in going there as that is not the purpose of this post. However loving our family is still very much a biblical thing to do.