O
- Status
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
The probelm is that, for the most part, it is only those who claim “intelligence” who refuse to believe that the stories of the Bible are accurate. Intelligence in and of itself is not wrong. I would like to say that I am intelligent. But when it becomes a matter of believing your sense of intelligence to be greater than the Word of God, it becomes as an evil, or under the influence of evil.
O
Orogeny
Guest
B
Brian_Millar
Guest
Well, along the overpopulation tangent, it’s not about physical space that is necessarily the issue, it’s about being able to support the population through the earths dwindling resources. Take into account polution for example. Here in Tacoma, it is very difficult to grow anything due to that factor, after several failed attempts at a garden in the city here and having to plant shrubery more then once, then supplimenting it along the way just to get some assemblence of a yard, if these conditions were worse, of which they will be in the future, globally, it will be a struggle just to feed the population.
Then take into account natural disasters, such as if a large meteor crashes into the planet, we could be wiped out completely., This is an eventuality not a possiblity, the same as when the sun dies out and goes supernova. I don’t know about you, but I feel uneasy having all of our eggs in one basket here, we will have to build yet another ark, this one space faring…
Then take into account natural disasters, such as if a large meteor crashes into the planet, we could be wiped out completely., This is an eventuality not a possiblity, the same as when the sun dies out and goes supernova. I don’t know about you, but I feel uneasy having all of our eggs in one basket here, we will have to build yet another ark, this one space faring…
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
God needs nothing - but people need a lot of things.
And it is simply a fact that the religion of Israel-Judaism-Apostolic Christianity is influenced by its surroundings. Some account needs to be given, to explain why this is: for instance, how are the similarities between Baal & the god of Israel to be accounted for ? Or the notion of creation by word: a notion which is found in Israel, & Egypt & Mesopotamia ? Or the idea of the assembly of the gods/sons of godJesus did not come out of a holy vacuum, free of all non-Israelite influence; He came from “Galilee of the Gentiles”, in a place which was under Roman control, had been influenced by Greek, Persian, & many other such ideas; He was a man like us, so it is artificial to suppose that He was uninfluenced by His background; the evidence is all the other way. When Paul preached to the Athenians, he quoted a Stoic poet. When he talked about the triumph of Christ over the principalities and powers, he was proclaiming the triumph of Christ over astrological determinism, just as Matthew does in chapter 2 of his gospel.
This does not pervert the Gospel - it shows its victory, & the human influences God made use of to prepare for it. If the Incarnation is a reality, it is to be expected that it will be prepared for by the “incarnation” of God’s purpose in a particular people, giving rise to a particular set of books; the Incarnation fits into a pattern. That does not make it any less the Work of God: is Baptism any less the work of Christ among His people because it uses everyday things like water & words ? Then why should the history of Israel be different ?
As for the OT warnings against imitating the nations & their gods - that is part of the OT attitude to them. It should not be isolated from the rest of the OT, for it is not the whole story.
So what do you think of the parables ? Are they biographies ? Is the teaching of Jesus any less valuable or weighty if the Prodigal Son never existed ? The Bible, with its JHWH on His cherub-throne, its many-headed red dragon, its talking trees, wrestling river-god, talking donkey, laughing JHWH, & sea-serpent, is full of mythological language & figurative speech. That doesn’t make it less Divine - it makes it more fully human, & much more enjoyable.
Taken as records of real events, this language would be intolerable, for it would require us to believe that the Ascension could be understood by asking questions about the escape velocity of the Saviour’s Body, & the time taken before He arrived at His Father’s hand. The Ascension is a reality - but not one that can be described as a physical occurrence; it is not that kind of reality. Nor is God - so the Bible uses figurative speech; He cannot be described, for He is the God Who is Indescribable. In that sense, the figurative speech is not true; but it does tell something about Him.So how do you propose to account for the many similarities, of many kinds, between the Israelites & their religion OTOH, & their neighbours on the other ? There are significant differences - that is not a reason to ignore what is not different.
Why is it out of the question that a people surrounded by others for 1200 years or so should have been influenced by those others ? What people is uninfluenced by its neighbours ?
P
peary
Guest
I wouldn’t worry about meteors or asteroids. Our sun going supernova? Maybe in another several billion years! I remember what pollution was in the 50s and 60s - absolutely horrible no matter where you were. We’ve cleaned up our act a lot since then. In fact, we have cleaner air and water now than we did then. Look at the Cuyahoga River. Everybody thought it was gone, and they launched into a program that cleaned it up. And, as I posted before, we will probably reach the 7 or 8 billion mark as far as human beings are concerned and then it’s a fast dip down because we aren’t producing more human beings to pass on cultures, traditions and societies. For us, it is definitely the end of an era.
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
Any similarity between God and baal are concocted by the great deciever…in order for you to be able to make the argument that you are…decieved.
God did not have to have anything about Noah and the Flood in the Bible at all! He CHOSE to put it there, and it is an accurate account, of which both Jesus and St. Peter refer to. He can neither decieve or be decieved. In other word, all things in the Bible are inspired of the Holy Spirit…Who can neither decieve nor be decieved. It is a fallacy and heretical to believe that God lied to us. He could have said…“What happened was that there was a regional flood, and no boat was needed, and I couldn’t find a way to put all of the animals on a boat.” THAT IS TOTALLY NOT GIVING GOD CREDIT FOR BEING THE ALL POWERFUL GOD!!!
God dictates nature…we humans don’t tell Him what He has to do…and if we are smart, we don’t call Him a liar!
The parables were told by Jesus as He began that they were just that…parables. He didn’t tell a story that wasn’t true. He said…“Listen to this parable, The kingdom of heaven is like…”
It was well known to all of His followers that they were parables, and Jesus was the one to tell them that they were parables. He could have said that the story of the Flood is a metaphorical allagory. After all, He said that they were parables when He spoke them.
Not only that, it was told in the OT that one of the ways we would be able to recognize the Messiah was that He would come, speaking in parables.
Let me tell you a secret…only those who believe in Jesus are privy to it. It is something we acknowledge in our Creed. “We believe in Jesus, Son of God, eternally Begotten of the Father. For our sake, and for our salvation, He came down from Heaven and became Man.”
You are forgetting in your statement that He was indeed true man, but He was also TRUE GOD! He chose the Jewish people as His own. He did not choose those of other religions or no religions as His own…therefore, He was not influenced by them in His human state.
I have no idea what you mean by “astrological determinism”
And it does take away from the New Testament if you tear away at the accuracy of the OT. Jesus was prophesied of in the OT. If you start stating that things in the OT are false, or whatever allagorical metaphor means…false, then it discredits all of the Bible. ANd whether you like it or not, many, many who might fall into your heretical fallacy will realize that if it is not all believable, then maybe none of it is. Then they lose faith in Jesus, and reject His grace because of it.
I am a simple minded person…Thank you, Jesus…but even I have enough intelligence to realize this. It is something every intelligent person should realize, except that it is simple in its theology.
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
Please understand this:
Jesus told us that unless we have the faith of a child, we would not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.
Have you ever noticed that children will believe what you tell them, not requiring the proof in scientific evidence?
That is what Jesus calls us to do. Have the faith of a child. There are none who can fathom the Mind and Actions of the Holy Trinity. We were not created to be able to do so. And sometimes we fail to realize that. We are intelligent beings, and that is a wonderful creation of God. But we are meant to have faith in Him like the faith of a child.
I hope we will turn to Him to recieve such faith.
Jesus told us that unless we have the faith of a child, we would not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.
Have you ever noticed that children will believe what you tell them, not requiring the proof in scientific evidence?
That is what Jesus calls us to do. Have the faith of a child. There are none who can fathom the Mind and Actions of the Holy Trinity. We were not created to be able to do so. And sometimes we fail to realize that. We are intelligent beings, and that is a wonderful creation of God. But we are meant to have faith in Him like the faith of a child.
I hope we will turn to Him to recieve such faith.
B
Brian_Millar
Guest
Peary, are you just the type that insists upon argueing out of impulse? I’d work on that personality trait if I were you, it’s a fault that should be shed, especially when you are turning onto people that are supposed to be your allies. I guess it’s because the anti noah story believers are no longer posting you feel the need to carry on argument of any kind regardless.
I’m not going to patronize you with further comment on my statements, it’s clear you only want to argue, and with that, I have much better things to do wtih my time.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Read the texts.
God did not have to have anything about Noah and the Flood in the Bible at all! He CHOSE to put it there, and it is an accurate account, of which both Jesus and St. Peter refer to. He can neither decieve or be decieved. In other word, all things in the Bible are inspired of the Holy Spirit…Who can neither decieve nor be decieved. It is a fallacy and heretical to believe that God lied to us.## That may be so, but it doesn’t make figurative language non-figurative, nor does it alter that fact that Jesus spoke in parables; which are stories, & not records of real events. In no way does that make them any less valuable - it means only that truth can be told by means of fictions. And if that is so, there is no objection in principle to the possibility that the Noah story is also a fiction; whether it is a fiction, or not, is the issue. Not whether God uses fictions.The Bible has been called “the Word of God in the words of men” - & human writing includes the use of fiction, of figurative speech, of parables, of mythology. How is any of that incompatible with the truth of Scripture ? I hope you never talk about “sun-rise” & “sunset”
- for the sun does neither; it’s a familiar convention of speech, used everyday as well as in the Bible, which deceives nobody, because nobody imagines that the sun does either. How can it be heretical to point to what the text actually says ? You may not like my explanation of what it says - which is fair enough - but at least the explanation is an explanation of features of the Biblical text & of the culture in which it came into being. So if the explanation’s no good, what are you going to put in its place ?Explanation by inspiration is not an adequate explanation of the Bible - inspiration has no value as an explanation of external facts, because it is a framework for them; just as a picture frame is good for the picture it frames, but is not part of the picture it frames. Inspiration is part of our framework for making sense of the Bible - insofar as it is “in” the Bible, it may or may not be a fact: claims of inspiration are not limited to the Bible or the Israelites, so the mere claim to it is no reason to believe it.
That the devil is responsible for the similarities between the Bible & Israel, & other nations & texts, does not arise from those texts - it’s a general theological interpretation of those texts & nations & does not address the similarities (real or supposed). How is it a deceit that both the Gilgamesh epic & part of Genesis include a flood-story ?
God is all-powerful, certainly - but that fact cannot be used to interpret the Bible, because it allows anything to happen. An All-powerful God is able to beam Noah to the planet Mars, but there is no reason to suppose He did.
And though God is unlimited, man & the world are not. In the world we live in, elephants are subject to the law of gravity. They are not able to shrink to a thousandth of their size. They produce large quantities of waste. If they had floated upwards above the mountains for the duration of the Flood, that would left plenty of space free for other animals. There is no reason in the text or anywhere else to suppose such things happened to them, or to any creature. Unminiaturised, gravity-obeying, waste-producing elephants take up space in an Ark, as do other animals. The details of what animals do & are does not fit well with the details of the Ark, of the text of Gen. 6-8, & of a world-wide flood.See above
IOW, He used fictions. So why can others not do so ? Others did - see Judges 9 for example. That parable is metaphorical; it ascribes to plants things not literally true of them.
Do people say, every time they use a figure of speech, that they are doing so ? They rely upon the sense of their readers & hearers, who belong to their culture: & therefore do not need to be reminded of what they know. The confusion arises for those of different cultures - which is why we cannot impose our own ideas of how texts should speak upon them, but should listen to what they say. No one thinks Plato was a modern Londoner - they accept that he was an Athenian of the fifth century BC, & don’t expect him to talk like what he was not. So it is with the Bible. Only with the Bible is this very obvious point overlooked
Nor did I say he was. That He is the Word Incarnate does not make Him any less genuinely human.
There is more than one kind of accuracy. The OT is defective in some ways - it is inaccurate as a revelation of God, if Matthew 5.44 is compared to parts of the OT. The OT can’t have for Christians the status it had for Jews before AD 70, because it has been relativised by the coming of Christ. Hebrews 1.1 f. shows this. Galatians 4 does.
He wasn’t, but never mind - passages in the OT were applied to Him; which is not the same thing.
Does God have a beard ? The Bible says so. He doesn’t - the description is metaphorical; something not true as to the words is expressed by a vivid verbal picture, to make a point related to the thing described - in this case, His Wisdom. OId men often have beards, old men ought to be wise; so the symbol is named in order to refer to the thing symbolised. The beard is the symbol & metaphor, the Wisdom is the reality. How does that discredit the Bible ?That would be a simply illogical reaction. Besides, Christian faith is in Christ - the Bible is secondary. You don’t believe in the Bible in the totally unreserved way you first claimed - no Christian could, because it is a gradual revelation, proceeding from types & shadows to Christ Who is typified; as Hebrews 1 says.
O
Orogeny
Guest
So should we reject any and all scientific evidence that contradicts a literal reading of scripture? Are we a sola scriptura Church?
Peace
Tim
D
DL82
Guest
I believe, based on the Bible, on archaeological evidence, and on other stories from the Ancient Middle East, that there was a flood that covered the whole of that region of the world, which, from the viewpoint of the writers of Genesis, would be a global flood. I also believe that God spoke to Noah and told him in advance, because that’s the kind of God I believe in, One who is merciful to those who listen to Him.
P
peary
Guest
**For what possible reason, Brian, have you found it necessary to attempt to personally humiliate on a public forum like this?
Unfortunately, you will have to be placed on my ignore list…first poster. How sad.
And there was nothing in my post that warranted the personal attack which you typed.**
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
So did he take all the animals of the world on his boat, or just his livestock?
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
That may be so, but it doesn’t make figurative language non-figurative,
The Bible doesn’t refer to it as figurative, but as an historical fact.nor does it alter that fact that Jesus spoke in parables; which are stories, & not records of real events.
Jesus states that they were parables, and stories that Jesus told. They were not even presented as historical facts. The historical fact was that Jesus said it.
In no way does that make them any less valuable
Yes, if you start calling the word of God fiction, then it does indeed lesson the value. It is then just a nice story, not to be considered as anything that really happened, so it should not influence who we are as a people of God.
- it means only that truth can be told by means of fictions.
Fiction is the opposite of truth…what you are saying is totally contradictory of the definition of words. Fiction: did not happen, has no real authority. Non fiction: did happen, has authority.
God’s word is not fiction. He can neither decieve nor be decieved, and that would be deception.
The Bible has been called “the Word of God in the words of men”
Wrong. The Bible is the inspired Word of God. Men were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write ALL of the words written in the Bible. They were not given leave by God to write fiction about other religions to be used as a truth from Him. There are many things written by even the Apostles that were not included in the Bible…because only God chose what would be included in the Bible. Therefore, only completely accurate things are in the Bible.
- & human writing includes the use of fiction, of figurative speech,
Those are not included in the Bible
Jesus never used mythology in any of His parables.
I hope you never talk about “sun-rise” & “sunset”
- for the sun does neither; it’s a familiar convention of speech,The belief concerning the sunrise and sunset are no where in the Word of God
used everyday as well as in the Bible
***So are many other things that are not written in the Bible. I do the dishes every day, but that is not part of the Word of God contained in the Bible. ***
which deceives nobody, because nobody imagines that the sun does either. How can it be heretical to point to what the text actually says ?
It is not heretical to point to what the text actually says. You are the one claiming that the text is a lie…not me.
You may not like my explanation of what it says
True, because what you are saying is that the Word of God is a lie.
- which is fair enough - but at least the explanation is an explanation of features of the Biblical text & of the culture in which it came into being.
So if the explanation’s no good, what are you going to put in its place ?
That’s easy. The Word of God is perfect, and has no need to be replaced by this generation’s arrogance and pride in deciding that He lied.
Explanation by inspiration is not an adequate explanation of the Bible
Actually, that is exactly what it is…accurate and as adequate as God gave, and He is perfect and knows. It is the arrogance of man who has decided that it is imperfect or inadequate…heretically and falliciously
inspiration has no value as an explanation of external facts
Wrong. Everything inspired by God is it’s own explanation of external facts. God controlled every aspect of it, including every single word of it. Absolutely every word is accurate.
, because it is a framework for them; just as a picture frame is good for the picture it frames, but is not part of the picture it frames.
B]*Wrong to compare it to a framework. God is not the framework of the Bible. You are trying to compare Him to something material, something physical. You cannot if you want to understand Him. The Bible…Word of God…is totally about God and His creation, and the relationship between Himself and His chosen people, and then all of the Gentiles were included because of Jesus. How can you say that God is not part of the Word of God? Have you read the Bible? *
Inspiration is part of our framework for making sense of the Bible - insofar as it is “in” the Bible, it may or may not be a fact: claims of inspiration are not limited to the Bible or the Israelites, so the mere claim to it is no reason to believe it.
Everything in the Bible is a fact. No, God is not limited to the Bible, which was written long ago, and He is still inspiring people today, and we also have the inspirations He gave which let the Apostles throughtout the centuries know what EXACTLY was to be the One Holy Roman and Apostolic Catholic Church.
so the mere claim to it is no reason to believe it.
It is in the Bible. It is to be taken literally and as an accurate account of history and faith beliefs.
That the devil is responsible for the similarities between the Bible & Israel, & other nations & texts, does not arise from those texts -
Actually, it does. Jesus clearly states that there would be others to come as false prophets and false messiah’s. The devil is the great deciever that has come to cause us to turn away from God. What better way than to convince people that the Word of God is a lie? Also, the Apostles taught that those who turned away from the teachings were not to be believed nor their beliefs accepted. That is what you are doing…turning away from the beliefs and the Words of the Bible.
it’s a general theological interpretation of those texts & nations & does not address the similarities (real or supposed). How is it a deceit that both the Gilgamesh epic & part of Genesis include a flood-story ?
Did you read the story of the tower of Babel? After the flood, the area where people were living became very populated. They became filled with pride, and decided to be like gods, and tried to build a tower to heaven. Then God destroyed the tower, and confused all of the population…making them to speak in different languages. And He sent them to all the earth. What is to say that some of those people did not take parts of that story and create in it a myth. That does not lesson that the story of Noah and the Flood were the accurate story…only that some of the people who had been scattered at the destruction of Babel took PART of the story.
God is all-powerful, certainly
You obviously don’t believe that, because you believe He decived us because He couldn’t tell us the truth!- but that fact cannot be used to interpret the Bible, because it allows anything to happen.
An All-powerful God is able to beam Noah to the planet Mars, but there is no reason to suppose He did.
***NO, there is no reason to believe that He did. It never mentions beaming Noah to the planet Mars. See how important it is to accept what is in the Bible? ***
And though God is unlimited, man & the world are not. In the world we live in, elephants are subject to the law of gravity. They are not able to shrink to a thousandth of their size. They produce large quantities of waste. If they had floated upwards above the mountains for the duration of the Flood, that would left plenty of space free for other animals. There is no reason in the text or anywhere else to suppose such things happened to them, or to any creature. Unminiaturised, gravity-obeying, waste-producing elephants take up space in an Ark, as do other animals.
Elephants have indeed been transported by ship. They are not indegiounous to the USA, yet I can go to a zoo and see them. Nothing else in the words above apply or make any sense.
continued on next post
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
The details of what animals do & are does not fit well with the details of the Ark, of the text of Gen. 6-8, & of a world-wide flood.
So why can others not do so ? Others did - see Judges 9 for example. That parable is metaphorical; it ascribes to plants things not literally true of them.
See, how long will it take for you to reach the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in saying that the Bible is a lie?" If other things that man is unable to understand are to be taken as works of fiction, please explain to me the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. And you cannot use the argument about the power of God…cause you do not wish to use it to say that He can do anything else He chooses.
Do people say, every time they use a figure of speech, that they are doing so ?
No, but Jesus states that he is using parables. I have already explained that.
They rely upon the sense of their readers & hearers, who belong to their culture: & therefore do not need to be reminded of what they know. The confusion arises for those of different cultures - which is why we cannot impose our own ideas of how texts should speak upon them, but should listen to what they say.
***In no time or culture was it normal for the whole world to be destroyed by a flood except for Noah and those animals God chose to send to the ark in order to be saved. ***
No one thinks Plato was a modern Londoner - they accept that he was an Athenian of the fifth century BC,
It is an historical fact. It is not left up to interpretation…just like the story of Noah.
& don’t expect him to talk like what he was not. So it is with the Bible. Only with the Bible is this very obvious point overlooked
***Wrong. Historical facts are historical facts irregardless of the time and culture. The words are not difficult to understand. It happened. How long before you use the same argument to try to discredit everything else in the Bible? ***
Does God have a beard ? The Bible says so. He doesn’t - the description is metaphorical; something not true as to the words is expressed by a vivid verbal picture, to make a point related to the thing described - in this case,
Jesus certainly did have a beard. Where does it say or imply that He didn’t?
His Wisdom. OId men often have beards, old men ought to be wise; so the symbol is named in order to refer to the thing symbolised. The beard is the symbol & metaphor, the Wisdom is the reality. How does that discredit the Bible ?
Jesus did have a beard. Many Jewish men had beards…still do.
See above
Unless you consider the POWER OF GOD to do what He wills with His own creation. If He chooses to make men float upside down, and yet not have the blood flow to their brains, HE CAN DO IT!! Repeat after me…HE IS GOD. He is not bound by the laws of nature as man and animals and plants of this earth are. He is unlimited in His abilities to do whatever He wants. He regretted creating the world in the time of Noah, so He destroyed it…and He chose to save Noah and enough animals to repopulate the earth. Doesn’t seem difficult for God at all. Just for some people who have to try to limit God’s ability to act on His decisions.IOW, He used fictions.
Nope. Wrong. False. He had no reason to lie to us. He is perfect and can neither decieve or be decieved. But man can…so be careful.**So why can others not do so ? Others did - see Judges 9 for example. That parable is metaphorical; it ascribes to plants things not literally true of them.
See, how long will it take for you to reach the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in saying that the Bible is a lie?" If other things that man is unable to understand are to be taken as works of fiction, please explain to me the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. And you cannot use the argument about the power of God…cause you do not wish to use it to say that He can do anything else He chooses.
Do people say, every time they use a figure of speech, that they are doing so ?
No, but Jesus states that he is using parables. I have already explained that.
They rely upon the sense of their readers & hearers, who belong to their culture: & therefore do not need to be reminded of what they know. The confusion arises for those of different cultures - which is why we cannot impose our own ideas of how texts should speak upon them, but should listen to what they say.
***In no time or culture was it normal for the whole world to be destroyed by a flood except for Noah and those animals God chose to send to the ark in order to be saved. ***
No one thinks Plato was a modern Londoner - they accept that he was an Athenian of the fifth century BC,
It is an historical fact. It is not left up to interpretation…just like the story of Noah.
& don’t expect him to talk like what he was not. So it is with the Bible. Only with the Bible is this very obvious point overlooked
***Wrong. Historical facts are historical facts irregardless of the time and culture. The words are not difficult to understand. It happened. How long before you use the same argument to try to discredit everything else in the Bible? ***
Nor did I say he was. That He is the Word Incarnate does not make Him any less genuinely human.
Yes, but you are trying to make God into Man, and 2 of the 3 Persons of the Holy Trinity never became man. So, what is your point in saying that?There is more than one kind of accuracy. The OT is defective in some ways
***False. It is accurate in every way. It is a fallacy on man’s part to believe anything else. ***- it is inaccurate as a revelation of God, if Matthew 5.44 is compared to parts of the OT. The OT can’t have for Christians the status it had for Jews before AD 70, because it has been relativised by the coming of Christ. Hebrews 1.1 f. shows this. Galatians 4 does.
He wasn’t, but never mind - passages in the OT were applied to Him; which is not the same thing.
The OT told of the coming of the Messiah, Who is Jesus Christ. Matthew doesn’t say any differently. The status wasn’t given until Jesus died, rose, ascended and sent His Holy Spirit upon those in the Upper Room…when the Catholic Faith was born.Does God have a beard ? The Bible says so. He doesn’t - the description is metaphorical; something not true as to the words is expressed by a vivid verbal picture, to make a point related to the thing described - in this case,
Jesus certainly did have a beard. Where does it say or imply that He didn’t?
His Wisdom. OId men often have beards, old men ought to be wise; so the symbol is named in order to refer to the thing symbolised. The beard is the symbol & metaphor, the Wisdom is the reality. How does that discredit the Bible ?
Jesus did have a beard. Many Jewish men had beards…still do.
That would be a simply illogical reaction. Besides, Christian faith is in Christ - the Bible is secondary. You don’t believe in the Bible in the totally unreserved way you first claimed - no Christian could, because it is a gradual revelation, proceeding from types & shadows to Christ Who is typified; as Hebrews 1 says.
Without the Bible, you have no reference to Christ. It therefore is logical to say that if the Bible is a lie, then so is Christ.
B
Brian_Millar
Guest
What ever…For what possible reason, Brian, have you found it necessary to attempt to personally humiliate on a public forum like this?
Unfortunately, you will have to be placed on my ignore list…first poster. How sad.
And there was nothing in my post that warranted the personal attack which you typed.
P
Philipp
Guest
Without the Bible, you have no reference to Christ. It therefore is logical to say that if the Bible is a lie, then so is Christ.The details of what animals do & are does not fit well with the details of the Ark, of the text of Gen. 6-8, & of a world-wide flood.
See above
Unless you consider the POWER OF GOD to do what He wills with His own creation. If He chooses to make men float upside down, and yet not have the blood flow to their brains, HE CAN DO IT!! Repeat after me…HE IS GOD. He is not bound by the laws of nature as man and animals and plants of this earth are. He is unlimited in His abilities to do whatever He wants. He regretted creating the world in the time of Noah, so He destroyed it…and He chose to save Noah and enough animals to repopulate the earth. Doesn’t seem difficult for God at all. Just for some people who have to try to limit God’s ability to act on His decisions.
IOW, He used fictions.
Nope. Wrong. False. He had no reason to lie to us. He is perfect and can neither decieve or be decieved. But man can…so be careful.**
So why can others not do so ? Others did - see Judges 9 for example. That parable is metaphorical; it ascribes to plants things not literally true of them.
See, how long will it take for you to reach the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in saying that the Bible is a lie?" If other things that man is unable to understand are to be taken as works of fiction, please explain to me the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. And you cannot use the argument about the power of God…cause you do not wish to use it to say that He can do anything else He chooses.
Do people say, every time they use a figure of speech, that they are doing so ?
No, but Jesus states that he is using parables. I have already explained that.
They rely upon the sense of their readers & hearers, who belong to their culture: & therefore do not need to be reminded of what they know. The confusion arises for those of different cultures - which is why we cannot impose our own ideas of how texts should speak upon them, but should listen to what they say.
***In no time or culture was it normal for the whole world to be destroyed by a flood except for Noah and those animals God chose to send to the ark in order to be saved. ***
No one thinks Plato was a modern Londoner - they accept that he was an Athenian of the fifth century BC,
It is an historical fact. It is not left up to interpretation…just like the story of Noah.
& don’t expect him to talk like what he was not. So it is with the Bible. Only with the Bible is this very obvious point overlooked
***Wrong. Historical facts are historical facts irregardless of the time and culture. The words are not difficult to understand. It happened. How long before you use the same argument to try to discredit everything else in the Bible? ***
Nor did I say he was. That He is the Word Incarnate does not make Him any less genuinely human.
Yes, but you are trying to make God into Man, and 2 of the 3 Persons of the Holy Trinity never became man. So, what is your point in saying that?
There is more than one kind of accuracy. The OT is defective in some ways
***False. It is accurate in every way. It is a fallacy on man’s part to believe anything else. ***
- it is inaccurate as a revelation of God, if Matthew 5.44 is compared to parts of the OT. The OT can’t have for Christians the status it had for Jews before AD 70, because it has been relativised by the coming of Christ. Hebrews 1.1 f. shows this. Galatians 4 does.
He wasn’t, but never mind - passages in the OT were applied to Him; which is not the same thing.
The OT told of the coming of the Messiah, Who is Jesus Christ. Matthew doesn’t say any differently. The status wasn’t given until Jesus died, rose, ascended and sent His Holy Spirit upon those in the Upper Room…when the Catholic Faith was born.
Does God have a beard ? The Bible says so. He doesn’t - the description is metaphorical; something not true as to the words is expressed by a vivid verbal picture, to make a point related to the thing described - in this case,
Jesus certainly did have a beard. Where does it say or imply that He didn’t?
His Wisdom. OId men often have beards, old men ought to be wise; so the symbol is named in order to refer to the thing symbolised. The beard is the symbol & metaphor, the Wisdom is the reality. How does that discredit the Bible ?
Jesus did have a beard. Many Jewish men had beards…still do.
That would be a simply illogical reaction. Besides, Christian faith is in Christ - the Bible is secondary. You don’t believe in the Bible in the totally unreserved way you first claimed - no Christian could, because it is a gradual revelation, proceeding from types & shadows to Christ Who is typified; as Hebrews 1 says.
Thank you Jesus N Cherie for you wisdom and the ability to so uniquely express same. “Without the Bible, you have no reference to Christ etc.” The Catholic Church including all 28 of the church fathers and church councils right through Pope Pius X time period have agreed that the Bible IS the Word of God and should be taken literally as history (along with the many observations made by the writers both OT and NT).
It was only after the BIG LIE promoted by Darwin and Lyell (geology) did many Catholic theologians develop “itching ears” and cause our great Catholic Universities to teach the BIG LIE. We are seeing the results of 150 years of the BIG LIE on these many threads on origins. Let us pray that folks who read your responses will ponder them carefully.
in honor of the Most Holy Trinity and the inspired Word of His book.
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
Thank you Jesus N Cherie for you wisdom and the ability to so uniquely express same. “Without the Bible, you have no reference to Christ etc.” The Catholic Church including all 28 of the church fathers and church councils right through Pope Pius X time period have agreed that the Bible IS the Word of God and should be taken literally as history (along with the many observations made by the writers both OT and NT).
It was only after the BIG LIE promoted by Darwin and Lyell (geology) did many Catholic theologians develop “itching ears” and cause our great Catholic Universities to teach the BIG LIE. We are seeing the results of 150 years of the BIG LIE on these many threads on origins. Let us pray that folks who read your responses will ponder them carefully.
in honor of the Most Holy Trinity and the inspired Word of His book.Thank you for acknowledging the truth in my words.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Except that this is not so. Does a lie about a poster make a poster non-existent ? If the Bible were nothing but a pack of lies, that would not have the slightest effect on Christ, Who is well able to act regardless of whether there is a Bible (or any other of the appointed means of salvation ) or not.
Besides, no one is saying the Bible is a lie.All of it ? Even the Book of Revelation ? That contains no history. If you wish to believe that the devil is a many-headed red dragon who fell out of Heaven, be my guest. That is the “literal” meaning of the text. To take it literally makes a nonsense of it, because the the literal sense of words is not the same thing as what they are used to say in a particular context. “Jack killed the giant” may be true within a fairy-tale - it is true within “Jack and the Beanstalk”. It is not true as an assertion of historical fact.
If the devil did fall out of heaven, one wonders what his velocity was, whether he was affected by entry into earth’s atmosphere, whether his crowns fell off, what if anything kept them on, whether he used his wings to cushion his landing. And how come only he & his angels fell ? Does heaven have railings to keep people falling out of it ? That kind of question comes of confusing the letter of the text with what it means.To take the meaning of the letter of the Bible as the right one would mean that Jesus was sitting on the fingers of the right hand of His Father: that is not what “He sits on the right hand of the Father” means. If the meaning of the letter were alone correct, it would require us to believe that God is or has:
- eyes capable of independent motion
- nostrils
- a finger
- a net
- a sword
- a staff
- is composed of the chemical elements required for fire
- is subject to change
- is not subject to change
- causes evil
- laughs mockingly
- a tent
- a rock
- a lion
- can be reached by a ladder
- all this is in the Bible, & if true in the literalistic sense would be heretical. as well as absurd. “Our God is a consuming fire” is not a statement that God is inflammable or can be doused; it’s a metaphor, & is not untrue when understood as one. If people cannot see the difference between a metaphor, a falsehood, & a statement of “plain fact”, it is not easy to reason with them about an ancient body of literature containing all these.
It was only after the BIG LIE promoted by Darwin and Lyell (geology) did many Catholic theologians develop “itching ears” and cause our great Catholic Universities to teach the BIG LIE. We are seeing the results of 150 years of the BIG LIE on these many threads on origins. Let us pray that folks who read your responses will ponder them carefully.
Geology is a reality, & it is part of the world God created. Therefore it cannot be ignored, whether it makes difficulties for the understanding of the Bible or not. How does adding a few zeros to the age of the earth make God any less its Creator ?
- Status