A second note about spiritual language acquisition

ghoti

This is always a favorite example of phoneticians when they began explaining the sound system of English. The word above is pronounced "fish." How, you say? gh=f as in enough; o=i as in women; ti=sh as in imagination. Sleight of hand to be sure. But the example allows for discussion leading to establishing spelling rules in the English language.

So, would there be equivalent rules of spelling or pronunciation in the spiritual language code? For example, if a spiritual event happened for someone else, would it be safe to transfer that principle for myself if my circumstances are different? Or would that be like selecting gh to sound as an f at the beginning of a word. Or what about some of the cultural comments that Paul makes? Is the thinking today that a woman's hair is her glory? Perhaps a woman's brain is her glory today or her class status or her ability to cook delicious food or any number of things. Or what about the application of Old Testament ideas to the modern scene? Because Hezekiah received 15 more years for his life, does that mean we also can negotiate with our Maker? Because the last book of Daniel is a book written in 164 BC using a former Jewish hero and having him "interpret" visions that applied to the oppressive times of Antiochus Epiphanes, does that mean that the modern person should be looking for some kind of modern application of the book (usually explained by religious people as a prophecy for modern times)?

Problems learning how to read the English language have come to be known as dyslexia. It's a correctable condition. I'm wondering if compensation for dyslexics needs to happen in the world of spiritual reading as well. Biblical scholars abound. Maybe they could help us learn something about spiritual reading.