Hi Karl,
== Even your characteristic that physical references are allegorical is a
concession to Greek philosophical thinking, one that I am not
willing to make.
That's fine, we can agree to disagree. I just find it highly coincidental,
hence suspicious.
== Along the same lines are the anthropomorphisms for God. An English
equivalent would be the statement "He walked into that situation with open
eyes" which all but the most obtuse would recognize that the person in
question did something fully recognizing what he was getting into;
No, that is an idomatic expression.
== I see no reason to say that ancient Hebrews did not recognize these as
figures of speech.
What you guys can't seem to come to grips with is the fact that you're
assuming these woprds are idomatic expressions without evidence. When the
literal reading makes perfect sense, there is no reason to go hunting for
plausible, variant explanations. Explanations which merely beg the question.
It isn't enough that the Hebrews couldn't have used these as idomatic
expressions. Following this rationale, they "could have" understood
"backparts" to mean green pea soup. I mean, can you prove that they didn't?
When the plain reading makes perfect sense, metaphor and allegory must be
proved, not assumed.