[Avodah] Local, Non-Global or Global Flood

[Arie Folger]

RZL wrote:
>> On 11/30/2010 2:27 PM, Arie Folger wrote:
>> I consider the preference for primary meanings of words to
>> be an a priori tendency, not an absolute rule...
>> it is however not convincing to assume that words
>> always mean their primary meaning, except in the most extreme
>> circumstances.
>
> So you're saying that you disagree with the authorities I quoted,
> because they only allow for non-primary interpretation in the most
> extreme circumstances? They are clear about the circumstances that
> disqualify the primary meaning. Where do you see they limit secondary
> meaning to "extreme" circumstances?

As I wrote, I think that you misread these sources. Language is not
math. Those sources are not talking in a formulaic manner, but rather
of the dominant predisposition. Yes, we are predisposed to interpret
words according to their primary meaning, and extreme issues will
always compel us reinterpret words and idioms according to alternative
readings that are in line with the theological principles. However,
that does not exclude the possibility that other texts, where lesser
issues arise, may also have to, or be allowed to be read differently.

>> ... I just refer to the gemara in 'Hullin, dibru
>> hakhtuvim belashon havai. I agree that doesn't give me or you licence
>> to just redefine things as lashon havai at will, but the presence of
>> lashon havai is an established fact, in 'Humash, no less.
>
> I'm getting confused. You consider the posuk cited there, "Cities
> fortified up to the heavens" as a non-extreme circumstance?

Sure, Why can't they literally reach up to the heavens? Why not say
that their walls were reaching a mile or two high, higher than all the
surrounding mountains, and that they stood thanks to kishuf, koa'h
hatumah, and that barring an opposite nes, no one would be able to
conquer them, not the Egyptians, not the Persians, not the Greeks, not
the Romans and not the Russians?

But common experience tells us (a) that city walls are never that
high, nor are they ever held up by visible ko'hot hatumah, and (b)
that lashon havai is often used in describing seemingly impregnable
fortresses.

Just because 'Hazal say this is a nonliteral idiom does not mean that
the issue is extreme. Isn't the set of midrashim about Og being a
super-extra-extra-gigantic giant every bit as surprising as city walls
reaching for the heavens, and then some? (this should lead us to seek
to understand those midrashim, too.)

KT,
-- 
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?