The Bible is a book full of imagery. Certainly there is much imagery in biblical poetry, and the “apocalyptic” writings provide powerful imagery. Biblical parables utilize the literary technique of “parallel” imagery, and Jesus primarily used parables as His teaching technique. Throughout the Bible, and particularly in the OT, there is imagery constantly being presented. The narratives describe people, places, and things with all sorts of imagery. Also, the detailed descriptions of various characters and the graphic destinies of people, tribes, and nations form images in our mind. Even the names of people depict an imagery by their meaning. And it is the purpose and meaning of that imagery that is being challenged. What is God’s purpose for all those images? What is the primary information being conveyed by the images created by the words of the Bible? What wisdom is God trying to impart in us? What does He want us to understand?
According to the fetus scenario, the biblical images that depict events as occurring in this world should logically be perceived as symbolic images depicting our future spiritual world. Alternatively, according to religion and man’s wisdom, the exact same biblical images should naturally be perceived in a literal historical manner. So, one perspective perceives the words in the Bible as symbolic images depicting a spiritual world, and the other perspective perceives the exact same words as literal images depicting this temporal world. What should be considered to logically decide which perspective correctly perceives the intended meaning of the words?
Perhaps you should consider the popular optical illusion where one drawing appears to depict an image of either a young or an old woman. Notably, just like the words of the Bible, the exact same lines and markings create the perception of two dramatically different images. What influences which image is perceived? Is it a matter of your eyes where you need to make an adjustment to your line of sight; much like the illusion where you must somehow force your eyes to adjust their primary focus to perceive a second image? If not your eyes, then is it a matter of your brain, where your brain’s line of thought must make an adjustment in its perspective? I suspect some people find it easy to switch perspectives and alternate between images, while others have a brain that struggles to change its perspective. Presumably, young people are more likely to perceive the image as a young woman, whereas older people are more likely to perceive the image as an old woman. Importantly, even though two dramatically different images are both always present, it is your brain’s primary line of thought that determines which image you perceive. Notably, if you were told in advance that the image depicts either an old woman who is facing one way or a young woman who is facing a different way, then are you not more likely to perceive that particular image? However, assuming the artist primarily intends to convey a particular image, how do you know which is the intended image? Did the artist leave any obvious indication as to which image he intended to depict? If not, what should be logically considered such that one image can be judged more likely to be the artist’s intended image?
Which image is intended?
Let’s assume that the overwhelming majority of people perceive the image as depicting a young woman, so can they claim with high certainty that the artist intended that image? Can they tell a person who perceives the image as an old woman that he is wrong? Presumably, the young woman is easier to perceive and she’s prettier than the alternative, so is it correct to conclude that the artist intended to depict a young woman? What should be considered to discern which image the artist intended?
Perhaps aspects of the image itself might infer which image is the artist’s intent. For instance, perhaps the perspective that perceives a young woman has areas which upon closer inspection appear inconsistent or out of place. Perhaps the area which depicts her ear appears more like an eye, or her bonnet appears inconsistent or confusing in some manner. Conversely, when the image is perceived as an old woman, perhaps all the particular areas within the image appear consistent without confusion. Assuming those results, would it not be logical to assume that the artist intended to convey the image of an old woman since a closer inspection revealed no inconsistencies and did not result in any confusion?
Ultimately, I am arguing that a different overall image of scripture exists, and that we should employ the same logical thinking to discern which perspective God intended for His Word. Do you agree that we can logically determine which perspective results in a clear and consistent understanding of the images, and which perspective results in ambiguity and confusion?
Perceptions of areas within overall image
Consider what happens if two people, each using a different perspective, were asked to describe a particular area within the image. Can you perceive how they would likely provide two totally different descriptions or understandings? Whereas one person might describe a particular area as a nose, the other person might describe the same area as a cheek. Are both understandings correct, or is the correct understanding only known if you first know the overall image intended by the artist? Therefore, for two people to agree on the intended understanding of any particular area within an image, they must first agree on the artist’s overall intent. Because, once the artist’s overall intent is known, then the correct understanding of every area is effectively pre-determined, and it would be incorrect to selectively use the “alternative” understanding of an image.
Arguably, everyone creates their own “alternative” understanding of the biblical images, and it will be hard to overcome your “firm” understanding. Imagine what happens to the people who had always perceived the overall image as a young woman when they learn that the artist intended to depict an old woman. Their previous understanding for every area within the image would likely be overthrown. Certainly, the sudden realization that potentially all perceived understandings of God’s Word are incorrect should profoundly impact any person, and the magnitude of that impact would obviously depend on how much that person allowed that misunderstanding to influence their core beliefs and overall worldview.
Which image did God intend?
Arguably, the Bible should be perceived primarily as a book from God with symbolic images depicting the next age, however man’s wisdom has pre-determined that God’s Word is to be perceived primarily as a recording of literal historical events of this world. However, based on the logic discussed above, and by employing only the sixty-six books of scripture, we will survey multiple biblical images to determine which perspective results in inconsistencies and confusion, and which perspective results in a consistent and clear message.
Notably, when I speak of inconsistencies and confusion, I am speaking of perceptions that create inconsistencies and confusion compared to the expected “consistent” nature of God and His message. Logically, the way God treats people should always be perceived as being consistent, and His message should always be perceived as being consistent. Therefore, any perception otherwise is an apparent inconsistency that must be clearly resolved.
Importantly, I am not saying that God cannot be discriminate in His actions; however, if He does act differently, then the correct perspective must be able to clearly explain how and why He acted differently. Because, by approaching the Bible with God’s intended perspective, arguably every particular biblical image should be perceived clearly and fit consistently within the overall image. And, for me, the greatest joy is being able to more easily read God’s Word without any confusion or inconstancy.