Poetic interpretation? (creation, church, experience, bible, faith)

[Master Vigil]

Discussing the points made by a poet is like discussing the points made in any book (especailly the bible). Not too many people realize this. You all believe you read into it differently and find different meanings. Is it because it is impossible to know Frosts true thoughts? All poetry is supposed to infer is feelings, pictures, experiences, etc... Not facts. Could it also be that the bible and quran is the same way? Could it be that some people read into them differently and propose that "their interpretation is the truth?" Even though there is no need to look for "facts" in it?

(I know some are going to think, "But the bible is divinely inspired and therefore not compareable to poetry or prose. I disagree, I believe it is a stroy written by men and should be dealt with as such.)

[Unedited]

That's a very interesting question, and I have to say I agree. I've always thought of the bible as a story and think that faith should be found elsewhere, not by interpreted strictly from a book.

[Lightkeeper]

I think we interpret the Bible and other poetry from our own viewpoint. As we grow and mature we have different interpretations. That is why the Bible has been so popular. You can read it over and over and get a different interpretation depending on how much you have expanded your horizons. A good poem is universal and timeless and you can only get from it what you personally have experienced. Here is a poem by William Carlos Williams. Poets have been arguing for years over what this poem means. Does it have a deep meaning or did he merely record what he saw?

The Red Wheelbarrow

So much depends
upon

a red wheel
barrow

glazed with rain
water

beside the white
chickens

Many times the poet isn't aware of what he/she has written. Sometimes the meaning doesn't come into consciousness until years later.

[Scuba Pete]

and sometimes he just likes the sound of those words together.

But poets normally don't ask you to believe them. Or to learn meaning from their words.

Most of the bible was not written as prose, but in a far more utilitarian fashion. We seldom debate over variances of meaning in a News Paper article. Do we?

[lilithu]

Poetry is an attempt to put into words that which cannot be merely described. In that way it is very much like some forms of scripture. (There is a reason why UUs rely so heavily on poetry for our sermons.) Poetry attempts to describe subjective truth, not objective truth. If the reader has had experiences that allows him/her to understand/empathize with the poet, then the poem will ring true in a way that merely describing the situation would not. Whereas if the reader has not had such experiences, well... a gifted poet might be able to transcend even that and put the reader in his or her shoes for a moment. But often, the poem will not mean much to the reader in that case.

The first time that I read the Tao te Ching, I was 13. I read "The Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao" and tossed the book. What kind of doublespeak mumbojumbo was that? None of it made sense. Some time later, after more experiences, I read the same line and thought that I had never read anything more true, and that there was no more straightforward way to put it. I have felt the same way with certain poems.

[Master Vigil]

"But poets normally don't ask you to believe them. Or to learn meaning from their words."

This of course was not the original reason scripture was written. So I believe it was people's interpretation and need to control the masses that the need to "believe" began.

"Most of the bible was not written as prose, but in a far more utilitarian fashion. We seldom debate over variances of meaning in a News Paper article. Do we?"

It is not written in any way like a newspaper either. But even if it was, do you believe everything written in the newspaper?

[No*s]

MV,

Here is a point we largely agree . Scripture is quite poetic in that sense. Take the creation passage for instance. It was written in a specific generation, but due to its relationship to the believing community, its interpretation gradually changes with its context. There may well be multiple interpretations of the same passage, some literal and some rather figurative or metaphorical, and they both may be valid.

I do not believe, though, that they are completely subjective. That would remove all their authority. There are good readings, and bad readings, and even some correct readings and wrong readings. I simply use the Church as my guide as to whether I am on the right path, so that I will not diverge from the Christian faith.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Master Vigil

"Most of the bible was not written as prose, but in a far more utilitarian fashion. We seldom debate over variances of meaning in a News Paper article. Do we?"

It is not written in any way like a newspaper either. But even if it was, do you believe everything written in the newspaper?

Actually, the bible is written a lot like a newspaper. That's probably the best analogy for it. A newspaper is divided into different sections and each section serves a different purpose and so needs to be read in a different way. There's the news, the op-eds, the letters to the editor, obituaries, the comics, leisure, etc. Some of it is meant to be taken factually. Some of it is meant to be taken as informed opinion. Some of it is meant to be taken allegorically. Some of it is just for the plain joy of it (for example Psalms or the Song of Songs).

No, one does not believe everything that's written in a newspaper. But much of what is written in a good newspaper has value.

[Master Vigil]

"No, one does not believe everything that's written in a newspaper. But much of what is written in a good newspaper has value."

I concede in my point that it wasn't written like a newspaper. But I still don't see why the bible should be taken any more seriously than the newspaper, actually I take the newspaper more seriously than the bible. I cannot take either at face value as fact, no matter how much value it has.

"I do not believe, though, that they are completely subjective. That would remove all their authority."

I see it as an authority on the thoughts and "subjective" interpretations of the authors who wrote it.

"I simply use the Church as my guide as to whether I am on the right path, so that I will not diverge from the Christian faith."

And I believe the church has a subjective view, even though it may be a good view, I still do not believe it should be used as factual information.