From: specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net   
      
   On 3/24/25 2:37 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
   > On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 09:12:26 -0700, the following appeared   
   > in talk.origins, posted by Mark Isaak   
   > :   
   >   
   >> On 3/14/25 9:19 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
   >>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 20:13:29 +1100, the following appeared   
   >>> in talk.origins, posted by MarkE :   
   >>>   
   >>>    
   >>>>   
   >>>> The measure of literalism is in the *interpretation* of the text of   
   >>>> Genesis, not the quoting of it.   
   >>>>   
   >>> Nope; sorry. "Literalism" literally (sorry 'bout that) means   
   >>> that the text is taken exactly as read; no interpretation   
   >>> allowed. If it's interpreted it's not taken literally.   
   >>   
   >> Note that interpretation and literalism are not mutually exclusive. For   
   >> example, if I say, "The cat chased the dog" and you think, "It must have   
   >> been a pretty mean cat," that's interpretation, even though you still   
   >> read it literally.   
   >>   
   > So if I interpret "chased" to mean "played poker with", and   
   > you interpret it to mean "had sex with", "chased" is   
   > literally true for both? Seems like a not very good way to   
   > ensure accurate communication, but whatever floats your   
   > boat...   
      
   Or it could mean "The cat-o-nine-tails followed the gripping device as   
   both rolled on the pitching deck" (speaking of boats). So context is   
   important too. But without interpretation, you don't have *any* meaning,   
   only a series of squiggly line designs.   
      
   --   
   Mark Isaak   
   "Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That   
   doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)