[Avodah] Local, Non-Global or Global Flood

[Arie Folger]

RZS wrote:
<<True, we're not talking about literal vs. allegory; but about literal
(i.e.,  peshat) meaning. But there are rules for determining correct
literal meaning as well. Rav Saadia Gaon, the Rambam and the Ikkarim
explicitly, and others implicitly, maintain the meaning of the word must
be its primary meaning, unless it transgresses one of the rules you
mentioned. There is a hierarchy of meanings that must be followed:
Preferably primary; with cause (such as those you listed), non-primary.>>

Another way of looking at it is from G"d's perspective. Why would you
limit G"d to expressing Himself only in the most simple manner? His
Torah is complex, why should it be written according to the rules laid
out in elementary school? Great writers surely don't stick to those
rules, and express themselves with all the wealth of expressions the
human communicative canon offers. Wouldn't it make sense for us to
allow - kaveyakhol - G"d at least as much freedom?

So if the question is whether we are free to reinterpret words at
will, to the point of making Torah almost arbitrary, I agree with you
that it cannot be that we have such licence. OTOH, if the question is
whether the Torah may express itself in those types of figurative
speeches and utilize the non-primary meaning of a word, the answer
must surely be a resounding yes.

The challenge then becomes distinguishing possible truth from fancy.
Nothing new here.
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Basler Gymnasium experimentiert mit Chawrutá-Lernen
* Where Will We Find Refuge ... from technology overload
* Video-Vortrag: Psalm 34
* We May Have Free Will, After All
* Equal Justice for All
* Brutal Women of Nazi Germany
* Gibt es in der Unterhaltungsliteratur eine Rolle für G"tt?