Literality

Faith and Philosophy 6 (4):412-428 (1989)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Although the concept of the literal is very widely used in the discussion of biblical interpretation, it has seldom been deeply analysed. “Conservative” understandings of the Bible are often thought of as literal, but it is equally true that “critical” views are built upon literality. In some relations, literality seems to imply physicality, in others to mean exactitude in the rendering of “spiritual” realities. In Christianity the relation of Christians to the laws of the Old Testament is a prime area of application of these categories. Are the silences of the Bible to be taken as “literally” as its words? And does literality give us access to intentions?

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,098

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Sense and Literality: Why There are No Metaphors in Deleuze’s Philosophy.Daniel W. Smith - 2019 - In Dorothea Olkowski & Eftichis Pirovolakis (eds.), Deleuze and Guattari’s Philosophy of Freedom: Freedom’s Refrains. New York: Edinburgh University Press. pp. 44-67.
Divine Causation and Analogy.Paul Helm - 2022 - Roczniki Filozoficzne 70 (1):107-120.
In defense of the unification argument for predicativism.Sajed Tayebi - 2018 - Linguistics and Philosophy 41 (5):557-576.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-12-02

Downloads
47 (#348,224)

6 months
8 (#415,167)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Why the Bible Cannot and Should Not Be Taken Literally.Randall S. Firestone - 2014 - Open Journal of Philosophy 4 (3):303-318.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references