David

What is the methodology used to determine which parts of the text the original author intended literally and which parts the author did not intend literally? I find it difficult to believe that anyone can reliably make these distinctions. The fact that you responded to the question What was the author's intention? with who knows? is not encouraging as it suggests the distinction can be made without knowing (even speculatively) the author's intent. Please elaborate.

xaxxat

I think he was trying to give his god some street cred...

Solitary Man

In what way?

xaxxat

My god can "go to 11" miracles...

David

While I hate to break up this riveting exchange I think the class would like to know, Solitary Man, how one can tell the difference between when the text is to be taken literally and when it isn't. Can you enlighten us with your methodology, or have you just made this up on the fly? It's quite a claim and your silence is telling.

Solitary Man

How do you know when a speech given by Tacitus is to be read as literal or not?

xaxxat

That one is easy. When it supports his beliefs, it's literal. When it doesn't, it's figurative...

Class may now sneak off to the bathroom and smoke one...

(I know, I know... I always wanted me one of those colored letter bibles where the literal and figarutive were differentiated. Funny no one offers them.)

~M~

hmm? where did you get this conclusion from?

Solitary Man

Which beliefs would that be?

David

That's not going to work.

You have made the claim that the author did not intend for the raising of Lazarus to be taken literally. How do you know this? So far you have provided absolutely nothing, and now you appear to be avoiding the question.