R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
Its not depressing, if they are discussing the Bible, thats great, they are thinking about it. Perhaps this is the Holy Spirit starting to move in their lives.
- Status
E
EvangAlived
Guest
Not really. Read Genesis 2:9, 3:22,24. The “tree of life” is on earth, in the garden God “planted” (Genesis 2:8, it doesn’t say ‘created’ there, it says ‘planted’ there, which means it was a transplant from another location, 3rd Heaven (where God and the angels already dwelt) to begin with, which means earthly Eden was a branch from the Home (garden)school of Heaven), yet the flood wipes out all things on the earth covering the then highest mountains by quite a bit (Genesis 7:4,19,20,23, 8:4, 9:11; 2 Peter 2:5, 3:12 (see also Thomas Aquinas on it); even as the fire to come does likewise, Revelation 20), and yet in Revelation Jesus tells us that the very “tree of life” is in the 3rd Heaven, see Revelation 2:7, 22:2,14. He even speaks of those who will be in the resurrection of those who overcome (like Adam did).Actually, in order to reach those conclusions, all it takes is an unwillingness to yield to the teaching authority of the Church that Jesus himself founded, and a desire to interpret the Bible on one’s own.
Apologies if it sounds harsh, but arguing for Biblical literalism because you think it is literal… well, that’s the very definition of a circular argument.
God “planted” it on earth in Genesis, and therefore, did just as easily take it back up into Heaven before the flood to preserve it for Adam in his resurrection and the New Heavens and New Earth to come.
In Genesis 3:24, it says exactly why the angel (Cherubim) was placed at the entrance to the Garden, “to keep the way of the tree of life.”
Why would it (the way to it) need to be kept from mankind, Adam and Eve who had just been removed from the garden? They were now sinners. God (1 Timothy 6:16) did not desire them to be immortal sinners (Genesis 3:22; for that would be immortalized sin, yet sin has an end, a finishing point, see James 1:15). There had to be time so that the plan of redemption, hid in eternity, could be implemented by/through Jesus Christ.
Its all in scripture. I made nothing up, nor interpreted it. I simply quoted it and summarized it by citing the texts themselves. Don’t take my word, take the word of scripture itself, since it was God who gave it; John 17:17; Titus 1:2.
God interprets His own word, Genesis 40:8; 2 Peter 1:20; Isaiah 28:10,13; Psalms 12:6, etc. and other such examples may be given, even small bite sections, one word at a time.
I do not see it as harsh. I see it as an not-knowing upon your part.
As for “the church” (Acts 7:38), well that is another subject.
Last edited:
E
EvangAlived
Guest
I was about to quote you, but I saw that you removed it, so I did not continue the response to that.
F
Francis
Guest
@Dahominical
we can do so by explaining the inner meaning and deep-insight of the passage or word also many other aspects should to taken into consideration ,like example historical background Jewish customs and to whom it it addressed to, to the Jews or Greeks or roman soldiers and also the present situation and political view point, should be also considered ,and with prayer, wisdom, prudence the guidance of the holy Spirit
we can do so by explaining the inner meaning and deep-insight of the passage or word also many other aspects should to taken into consideration ,like example historical background Jewish customs and to whom it it addressed to, to the Jews or Greeks or roman soldiers and also the present situation and political view point, should be also considered ,and with prayer, wisdom, prudence the guidance of the holy Spirit
Last edited:
E
Elf01
Guest
Were Adam and Eve literally blind until they had eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?Gorgias:
Not really. Read Genesis 2:9, 3:22,24. The “tree of life” is on earth, in the garden God “planted” (Genesis 2:8, it doesn’t say ‘created’ there, it says ‘planted’ there, which means it was a transplant from another location, 3rd Heaven (where God and the angels already dwelt) to begin with, which means earthly Eden was a branch from the Home (garden)school of Heaven), yet the flood wipes out all things on the earth covering the then highest mountains by quite a bit (Genesis 7:4,19,20,23, 8:4, 9:11; 2 Peter 2:5, 3:12 (see also Thomas Aquinas on it); even as the fire to come does likewise, Revelation 20), and yet in Revelation Jesus tells us that the very “tree of life” is in the 3rd Heaven, see Revelation 2:7, 22:2,14. He even speaks of those who will be in the resurrection of those who overcome (like Adam did).Actually, in order to reach those conclusions, all it takes is an unwillingness to yield to the teaching authority of the Church that Jesus himself founded, and a desire to interpret the Bible on one’s own.
Apologies if it sounds harsh, but arguing for Biblical literalism because you think it is literal… well, that’s the very definition of a circular argument.
God “planted” it on earth in Genesis, and therefore, did just as easily take it back up into Heaven before the flood to preserve it for Adam in his resurrection and the New Heavens and New Earth to come.
In Genesis 3:24, it says exactly why the angel (Cherubim) was placed at the entrance to the Garden, “to keep the way of the tree of life.”
Why would it (the way to it) need to be kept from mankind, Adam and Eve who had just been removed from the garden? They were now sinners. God (1 Timothy 6:16) did not desire them to be immortal sinners (Genesis 3:22; for that would be immortalized sin, yet sin has an end, a finishing point, see James 1:15). There had to be time so that the plan of redemption, hid in eternity, could be implemented by/through Jesus Christ.
Its all in scripture. I made nothing up, nor interpreted it. I simply quoted it and summarized it by citing the texts themselves. Don’t take my word, take the word of scripture itself, since it was God who gave it; John 17:17; Titus 1:2.
God interprets His own word, Genesis 40:8; 2 Peter 1:20; Isaiah 28:10,13; Psalms 12:6, etc. and other such examples may be given, even small bite sections, one word at a time.
I do not see it as harsh. I see it as an not-knowing upon your part.
As for “the church” (Acts 7:38), well that is another subject.
E
EvangAlived
Guest
The scripture does not use the world “blind” in regards to Adam and Eve. It does use the words “eyes” and “opened”.
Eve, in Genesis 3:6 “saw” the tree, since it was “pleasant to the eyes” (natural matters), before having their “eyes” “opened” to good “and evil” (spiritual matters). Thus it deals with knowledge (or internal observation, see Genesis 2:19, God was to “see” what Adam named the animals), not physical eyesight, as Eve looking at the tree to begin with. Notice the connection of the words in Genesis 3:6, “to make one wise” (dealing with knowledge), to the following verse of Genesis 3:7, “eyes were opened” and “knew”. Thus dealing with internal sight, or understanding. A light shed upon something, previously unknown, such as experience.
Literal and natural reading of the text, explains itself. See also 1 Corinthians 15:46. The natural is first, then the spiritual. The natural is the foundation, see the natural lamb slain from the foundation of the world, coats of skins (Genesis 3), and the spiritual Lamb of God (John 1:29,36), Jesus as John the Baptist pointed to some 4,000 years later.
Last edited:
G
Gorgias
Guest
Can you see that you’re doing it again? Presuming that it’s literal, you assert that it’s literal.
By asserting that it’s literal on its face, you’re interpreting it.
Last edited:
S
Sophie111
Guest
So you are concerned Jesuss resurrection is literally true but Jonah and the whale and maybe some miracles are not and if reason is the criterion we Christians are in trouble?
Yes we are.
This Bible approach seems arbitrary for people without faith.
Reason is not a great argument for appearing consistent in reading the Bible.
In the end we accept Jesus rose from the dead not because its in the Bible but because its the core tenet of the faith handed down to us by the original founders/witnesses.
Yes we are.
This Bible approach seems arbitrary for people without faith.
Reason is not a great argument for appearing consistent in reading the Bible.
In the end we accept Jesus rose from the dead not because its in the Bible but because its the core tenet of the faith handed down to us by the original founders/witnesses.
Last edited:
E
EvangAlived
Guest
No, I cited 1 Corinthians 15:46, along with the text of Genesis.
Natural first, then later spiritual (Thomas Aquinas (along with many others) understood the same thing from the text itself, and put it in print, in the ‘Summa’).
The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:8-11) state the literal events.
Jesus Himself and the writers of the NT all state that Genesis (from Creation (Deuteronomy 4:32; Isaiah 45:12; 1 Corinthians 11:9) and the things therein unto the Flood, unto Abraham, unto Moses (2 Timothy 3:8-9; Hebrews 11:4-31), etc) is literal, see Matthew 23:35; Mark 24:38-39; Luke 11:51, 17:27; Mark 10:6-9 Hebrews 12:24; 2 Peter 2:5; Revelation 13:8.
Eden (on earth) was known as the Garden of the Lord, Isaiah 51:3; Ezekiel 31:8-9, 36:25; Joel 2:3, and there was a Garden in Heaven, Ezekiel 28:13.
The OT writers state that Genesis to Joshua is literal, see Job 22:15-17, 26:5, 31:33 (the Flood was literal); Psalms 104:5-9; Isaiah 54:9; John 3:14.
The writers of scripture understood Abraham and Lot and the events of Sodom and Gomorrah (in Genesis) as literal events, Deuteronomy 29:23; Isaiah 1:9, 13:19; Jeremiah 50:40; Lamentations 4:6; Amos 4:11; Zephaniah 2:9; Matthew 10:15; , 11:23-24; Mark 66:11; Luke 10:12, 17:29; 2 Peter 2:6; Jude 1:7, some of which, as in the cases of Jesus, Peter and Jude, link those events of Sodom and Gomorrah, to the Flood, and to Creation.
The Genealogy of Adam & Eve (a real individual person) is given in scripture, from OT to NT: Genesis 3:20-21, 4:1,25, 5:1-4; Deuteronomy 32:8; 1 Chronicles 1:1; Job 31:33; Luke 3:38; Acts 17:26; Romans 5:145; 1 Corinthians 15:22,45; 2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13-14; Jude 1:14.
No. God interprets (Genesis 40:8; 2 Peter 1:20), and I must speak that which is already written (Isaiah 8:20). The same with Philip. See Acts 8:32,33,35. Where did Philip begin? Where did Paul begin, Acts 17:2?
The Holy Ghost is given, and He speaks what He hears (from Jesus), and not of Himself. Therefore I must speak what Jesus said, and not of myself. See John 7:16-18.
There are many people today that are listening to men, rather than to what is written.
Last edited:
J
JM3
Guest
The context of the birth in Revelation 12:1-3 is found in Revelation 1:5 “and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, first-born of the risen dead”.
G
Gorgias
Guest
1 Cor 15:46 is talking about human nature, not whether Scripture should be interpreted literalistically.
Here, I suspect, you’re talking about what Catholics call the “senses of Scripture”. There is the literal sense, and there are also spiritual senses. Sometimes, folks get confused about what “literal sense” means. It does not mean “what is written on the page.” What it does mean is “what the human author meant to say.” So, if Paul writes “gird your loins”, he doesn’t mean “what is written on the page” – that is, “strap a sword to your leg!” What he really means is “prepare for battle” – in this case, a spiritual battle, which he describes in physical martial terms.
So, we can look at a text of the Bible and ask ourselves, “is the author speaking in figurative terms in order to teach us a spiritual lesson?” The Catholic Church would teach, for example, that this is exactly what’s going on in Genesis 3, in which a figurative narrative teaches us the truths about the fall of man.
So, if you want to talk “natural” and “spiritual”, in the context of Catholic theology, it’s necessary to recognize that “natural” doesn’t simply mean “literalistic.” That might be your theology… but Catholic theology predates it by a millennium and a half.
Ahh, but the $64,000 question is: was it global, or did it merely appear that way to the inspired writer?
The Catholic Church would agree that there were two first true human beings on the earth.
Look, if you want to prooftext, be my guest. I’m always going to come back to you and show you how you’re taking it out of context:
- Gen 40:8 is talking about the interpretation of dreams, not Scripture.
- 2 Peter 1 talks about how to interpret Scripture. If individuals do not interpret it, then who does? Jesus, for one. The leadership of the Church He founded, for another, since He gave them authority (Mt 16:19). If you have a competing interpretation – one that differs from Jesus’ and those to whom He gave authority to lead the Church… then who, exactly, do you think is doing the interpretation for you?
What happens when you speak something different than what Jesus said? Aren’t you “speaking of yourself”? Jesus said “this is my Body… do this in remembrance of me”, and the Church, since 33AD, has done so. Do you? Jesus said, “suffer the little children to come to me” and “baptize all nations”. Do you?
And, my friend, when you do not, then you must ask yourself, “why am I doing things differently than Jesus commanded?”
- Status