Lee – You said
I do have an idea what it means. It's like what we do when we repent, only God doesn't lie (your point), he doesn't repent from wrongdoing (your point again, I agree), and he doesn't change (where we disagree).
Saying that the following idea
God did not do what He said He would do
does not represent a change in god’s plans,
renders the text into meaningless nonsense, and I remind you, I am not looking for a meaningless meaning, I am looking for a meaning for the figure. Plus you don’t believe that anyway, you believe that God always knew what He was going to do and therefore there was no change in God’s course of action, so you both mince words, and lack meaning, and that is far from an answer to my bible conformity challenge.
You have not said what it “means”, you have danced all around the issue, and suggested what it does not mean.
Example, hit the road is a figure of speech, it does not mean what it literally/naturally says. The meaning emphasizes immediacy of the action, to start right away, to put in other words, it means “lets get it going”, “lets start without delay”.
Now that’s pretty informal, and there may be other associated implications, but that’s basically what it means.
I did not say, this is “like” what it means, I am not dancing around the issue by using terms like “conditions” or “qualifications”. I plainly explained the meaning of the figure. And to the extent that you did try to explain the meaning of the figure, you did 2 main things instead, 1) you made it sound natural and not figurative thus contradicting your figurative position, and then to the tiny extent that you take it figurative, 2) you just say it "does not mean" God changed from His previously intended course of action. That is not a "meaning" offered, that is saying what the figure does not mean! Please clarify or stand corrected into something meaningful and not contradictory.
You said
But people don't seem to be content with that, sometimes, and want *another* analogy to explain the analogy of "repents."
No, I do not accept analogy for analogy, I am asking for the meaning of the claimed figure. Right now,
because of your nonsense answer, I’d have to ask you exactly what text is literal and what is figurative.
If you will not explain the meaning of the figure, then such incompetence leaves you no standing to claim it is figurative and not literal.
So how about it, will you come work for me for a month or 2 if I pay you $50 per hour, but no more than $100/hour? The rate goes down considerably if you want payment before the job is complete. And don’t worry, when it comes time for me to pay you, I will come through with your variety of godly treatment of communicated ideas, turning what is literal into something figurative without reasonable justification.
