Today, continuing the formal meth approach, we'd like to present one of the simple logical methods for interpreting biblical textual events. Let's take a simple approach, based on a straightforward logical connection between events.
As an example, let's take the episode of Noah blessing his sons.
Let me remind the reader of the essence of those events: Noah, after the flood, planted a vineyard and produced wine, which he neglected a little more and, as a result, fell asleep naked with an open tent. His youngest son saw this and, laughing, told his two brothers about it. Unlike Ham, they not only didn't mock their father, but also covered his nakedness and the tent.
Let me remind the reader of the essence of those events: Noah, after the flood, planted a vineyard and produced wine, which he neglected a little more and, as a result, fell asleep naked with an open tent. His youngest son saw this and, laughing, told his two brothers about it. Unlike Ham, they not only didn't mock their father, but also covered his nakedness and the tent.
As we read, this seems like a ridiculous incident to us. Why then does Noah proclaim his famous blessings for his family? What do they mean? Why exactly these blessings?
If we use a simple logical approach to connecting events, everything will become clear to us. Moreover, we won't need to consult any other authoritative authors, Bible commentators, church leaders, etc.
Let's look at events as they are. In the most general sense, we have a cause (the event), the participants' attitudes toward it, and the consequence (evaluation) of the participants' opposing behavior. From this we can get the complete picture we need by using a logical approach to the events described.
So we see that one of the sons is condemned for such behavior without any blessings, and not he himself, but his son, i.e. the father’s grandson. The other two sons, for what seemed to be the same act, are blessed with absolutely orthodox statements.
For the average reader, this incident, like many other similar incidents in the Bible, will not lead to understanding or acceptance of these events as they are, which in turn will lead the reader to turn to commentators, teachers, and other sources of meaning.
Which, in turn, may be guided by different approaches in their interpretations and produce different meanings. These meanings, which are essentially unrelated, will subsequently diverge and become intertwined with the subsequent narrative, which, firstly, will complicate the interpretation, and secondly, may lead to confusion and error, at least in a probabilistic sense. And as we understand, this will lead to nothing and will make the process of understanding the text uninteresting.
But let's summarize our reasoning. Based on the above, we can say that the logically occurring event determined the relationship and internal state of its participants; it became visible and understandable to us.
Specifically, the younger son is condemned; his inner attitude toward his father stems from some kind of resentment. This resentment is later revealed by Noah in his blessing (or curse) for his grandson/son of the younger son.
In Shem's blessing, we see his leading role in this case, which is why Noah commends him so. Meanwhile, the curse of Ham's son is included in the latter's blessing.
In Japheth's blessing, we see that it was inspired by kind feelings for his father and agreement with his brother's thoughts. But the result of his blessing is not immediately clear to us. Using a logical approach, we can conclude that this blessing could have been given to any of the sons, but was given to Japheth for his determination, steadfastness, and in contrast to the condemned son.
Let's look at events as they are. In the most general sense, we have a cause (the event), the participants' attitudes toward it, and the consequence (evaluation) of the participants' opposing behavior. From this we can get the complete picture we need by using a logical approach to the events described.
So we see that one of the sons is condemned for such behavior without any blessings, and not he himself, but his son, i.e. the father’s grandson. The other two sons, for what seemed to be the same act, are blessed with absolutely orthodox statements.
For the average reader, this incident, like many other similar incidents in the Bible, will not lead to understanding or acceptance of these events as they are, which in turn will lead the reader to turn to commentators, teachers, and other sources of meaning.
Which, in turn, may be guided by different approaches in their interpretations and produce different meanings. These meanings, which are essentially unrelated, will subsequently diverge and become intertwined with the subsequent narrative, which, firstly, will complicate the interpretation, and secondly, may lead to confusion and error, at least in a probabilistic sense. And as we understand, this will lead to nothing and will make the process of understanding the text uninteresting.
But let's summarize our reasoning. Based on the above, we can say that the logically occurring event determined the relationship and internal state of its participants; it became visible and understandable to us.
Specifically, the younger son is condemned; his inner attitude toward his father stems from some kind of resentment. This resentment is later revealed by Noah in his blessing (or curse) for his grandson/son of the younger son.
In Shem's blessing, we see his leading role in this case, which is why Noah commends him so. Meanwhile, the curse of Ham's son is included in the latter's blessing.
In Japheth's blessing, we see that it was inspired by kind feelings for his father and agreement with his brother's thoughts. But the result of his blessing is not immediately clear to us. Using a logical approach, we can conclude that this blessing could have been given to any of the sons, but was given to Japheth for his determination, steadfastness, and in contrast to the condemned son.
As you can see, using only logical connections and connections between events, we've deduced useful truths from this brief example. Are these truths big or small?
Judge for yourself!
This example applies to all peoples and generations on planet Earth, to all of humanity as a whole. It determines their destiny, culture, and habitat.
Thank you for your attention!
Please feel free to ask questions and provide criticism. I'd be very grateful for your feedback on the article.
Judge for yourself!
This example applies to all peoples and generations on planet Earth, to all of humanity as a whole. It determines their destiny, culture, and habitat.
Thank you for your attention!
Please feel free to ask questions and provide criticism. I'd be very grateful for your feedback on the article.