P
peary
Guest
Originally Posted by peary
Where are you coming from??
Answer the question.
**Obviously, Twilight Zone.
**
Where are you coming from??
Answer the question.
**Obviously, Twilight Zone.
**
- Status
O
Orogeny
Guest
Why do you say that? Because buffalo is arguing for the accuracy of scriptures?Originally Posted by peary
Where are you coming from??
Answer the question.
**Obviously, Twilight Zone.
Peace
Tim
P
peary
Guest
**I am not sure exactly what he is arguing about, unless he is a creationist and believes in a literal 6 days (144 hours) to have brought the entire universe and earth into existence in their present forms. As a rational human being as well as a Christian I have problems with that, particularly in what we now know about the physical universe (including ourselves). In this sense, I do not believe that it is God Who does not understand His own creation as buffalo said, but it is we who do not understand His creation, and that would include the writer(s) of Genesis which is why they rely on the ancient cosmology they write about. The important thing to take away from Genesis is that, regardless, the entire universe was formed and guided by God. I have no problem exercising my Faith with reason - an attribute given to us by God to learn about Him. As for me, the bible is inerrant when it reveals our salvation. **
B
buffalo
Guest
Here is where I see the problem - I am in agreement that God does understand His creation. I agree we do not.
I see a problem in the inspiration part. If God inspired the authors then what they write is accurate today and yesterday. You are saying that they relied on ancient cosmology. Where does God fit?
P
peary
Guest
**It is very difficult for me to understand why this is so hard for you. Every ancient culture in the world had its own cosmology about the world and universe, how it came to be, how the world worked, how the members of a culture âfit inâ to a relationship with the cosmos. How is it that the majority of ancient cultures had no knowledge that the earth was round? Or that there were other cultures on the other side of the globe who had their own beliefs as to how the world and universe were created, most of the time radically different than what they themselves believed?
Because those who wrote Genesis were members of their own culture and how they looked at the world, they wrote down what they knew. The Genesis account, of course, is more of a statement refuting certain Babylonian and Sumerian beliefs in these cultures. But even the Genesis account postulates its own cosmology but with this difference: it is not a group of gods who create the world; it is One God. It is not a group of gods who capriciously and at random harrass human beings, but One God Who created us and Who loves us. It is not fate which rules the world but One God *with us *who reveals Himself and His Will to us, and this regardless of what a culture believes about how the world was created. And that goes for Science in our contemporary world too. Do you see the difference here?
The current explanation (cosmology) as to how the universe and world came into being is evolution. As such, evolution is looked upon as a random cosmic act, human beings and our world are just cosmic âaccidentsâ; fate rules. We are back with a new interpretation of the ancient cosmologies, unfortunately, without seeing the Hand of God in His handiwork.
Being an artist myself, I see everything in a very different light. Perhaps, yes, the universe is random, but so are artistic endeavors in many ways. An idea enters the mind of an artist and he or she then begins to work it out in trial and error on canvas, or in stone, or with sound (music), or in writing. It becomes a work in progress, and that is how I understand how God works. There are multiple levels of existence, in the sense that Godâs mind also has different ideas and has and continues to bring them forth. According to Scripture, the crowning achievement of Godâs creative efforts is the human being - us. And I believe that. So, for myself, God âfits inâ to the scheme of things quite necessarily.
Now, how does this affect my salvation? For one thing, if I wasnât alive and possess the gift of life, I would never know the love that God has for me, or that Jesus is my Savior. See? In all actuality, this is another level entirely than what I have been discussing. That is the true revelation. For me, I see no conflict. If there is a conflict with what I think I know about the outer world, then I have to make adjustments to my inner world, not to reject the outer world all together.**
B
buffalo
Guest
I have two questions:
- I understand Genesis and its refutations. If the inspired scripture has its own cosmology, then inspiration seems to be lacking. It either is inspired and therefore true or itâs not.
- God did not know what man would look like?
P
peary
Guest
**1. I am not refuting what God has revealed through Genesis: that He is the author of life and of the Universe, that He made us in His image and likeness - immortal beings; that He formed His own people; that He established a covenant with His people; that He incarnated into His creation in a special way at a certain time, date, and place, and told us Who He was and revealed His love for us, and how to regain our immortal nature again; that He died for us and for our salvation; that He is Triune in Person; that He established the roots for a new society of believers to carry on the revelation He revealed.
There are also different ways one must read the Bible to understand the Bible. First, you need to understand it in a cultural context; second, you need to understand it in a spiritual context and third, you need to understand it in a personal context (salvation). That the writers of Genesis used an ancient cosmology to get across certain truths does not negate those truths although what they wrote is not what we know now about the physical world and the universe. That is all they knew at the time. As I said before, what is inerrant in the Bible is Godâs revelation to us - our salvation. The Bible is inspired because of this, regardless of its flaws. Some have a very difficult time with this, and that is understandable, I guess. I donât have a problem with it.
- Of course God knew what humankind would look like. What makes you think He didnât? Didnât Jesus come into the world looking like us? We are a pre-figurement of Christ, in that sense.**
P
Philipp
Guest
I like your humor. But in reality the hypothesis of evolution of life from a common ancestor and long ages could be from the âtwilight zone in the minds of men.â Maybe Harold Pluimer has solved the problem of why evolution is even considered a theory of origins. This was on the front page of our local newspaper during the height of the UFO controversy.Originally Posted by peary
Where are you coming from??
Answer the question.
**Obviously, Twilight Zone.
A former âsenior lecturerâ with NASA and in 1975 with the âFuturistsâ said the following before 1500 persons at the Ohio School Board Association. He claimed that the puzzle of Unidentified Flying Objects will soon be solved. âThe pieces are fitting together and the emerging answer is simple.â Harold Pluimer went on to say, âUFOâs are NOT from outer space but from the bowels of the earth. They (UFOâs) came from about 40 miles below the surface,â he asserted. âThe powerful electromagnetism can make people hallucinate and also effects automobiles and planes.â Similar stories told by UFO witnesses and checked against lie detectors support his theory, Pluimer contended.
C
Contarini
Guest
Incredible literalism. No one is saying that âdayâ always means â1000 yearsâ in the Bible. And who is to say that Jonah is not a work of fiction, anyway? It sure looks like one.
Whoâs âyouâ? Do you mean that itâs obvious to all? Thatâs just plain silly. Catholics ought to no better than to engage in this wooden literalism. Fundamentalists have to. Catholics donât.
Youâre assuming that prose is always to be taken as history. Youâre also assuming that ancient Hebrews defined history in a way much the same as we do, and that they would have sharply divided history from myth in the way we do. A lot of assumptions, donât you think?
I think âjust a storyâ amounts to a blasphemous phrase. There is nothing more divine than a story!
Actually, to my mind it does. âIn the beginningâ sounds very much like a âOnce upon a timeâ opening to me.
I have no way of knowing for sure what the various people who told the story, or the person who first wrote it down, or the person who included it in Genesis in the form we have it thought they were doing. Scholars can make educated guesses, of course. And generally they donât agree with your view. However, what should matter most for us is the theological meaning the story has historically been given by the Church. Many of the Fathers recognized that the story was written in the âstyle of a popular poet,â even if many of them still took it in a more historical sense than most of us would today.
Edwin
C
Contarini
Guest
Why do you think that the story was inspired in order to teach us the details of physical cosmology? Why do you think that those details are required for the theological meaning of the story to be true? (In contrast, the story of Jesusâ resurrection loses all its force if it is not literally true. I would argue that this is the case for the virginal conception as well, although that is a bit more debatableâbut at any rate the Church insists on the historicity of that story. It doesnât do so in the case of Genesis 1. The nature of the story itself, for that matter, makes it extremely weird to claim that itâs history. Can you have history with no human observers?)
Edwin
P
peary
Guest
**Ah, but I never said that I believed in a common ancestry of all living things - and that includes human beings.I like your humor. But in reality the hypothesis of evolution of life from a common ancestor and long ages could be from the âtwilight zone in the minds of men.â Maybe Harold Pluimer has solved the problem of why evolution is even considered a theory of origins. This was on the front page of our local newspaper during the height of the UFO controversy.
A former âsenior lecturerâ with NASA and in 1975 with the âFuturistsâ said the following before 1500 persons at the Ohio School Board Association. He claimed that the puzzle of Unidentified Flying Objects will soon be solved. âThe pieces are fitting together and the emerging answer is simple.â Harold Pluimer went on to say, âUFOâs are NOT from outer space but from the bowels of the earth. They (UFOâs) came from about 40 miles below the surface,â he asserted. âThe powerful electromagnetism can make people hallucinate and also effects automobiles and planes.â Similar stories told by UFO witnesses and checked against lie detectors support his theory, Pluimer contended.
Oh, by the way, I think Saint Paul had an answer to the UFO controversy.
**
B
buffalo
Guest
To be inspired it must be truth for all ages. That is the starting point of the conversation.
No I do not think it is teaching cosmology. However, there are points of intersect. Where they do intersect, Revelation must be given its due.
One place - Eve coming from Adam. This intersect rules out polygenism, it rules out evolution in the case of man. It firmly points to special transformism.
Bodily immortality, preternatural gifts, infused knowledge all have to be reckoned with.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Itâs inspired, but itâs conditioned by the limitations of the persons for whom it was initially intended. That is why itâs in Hebrew - its immediate hearers & compilers were speakers of Hebrew. They would not have understood languages spoken 3000 years later. Or the concepts familiar 3000 years later. They had to be addressed in terms familar to them.
This is sound pedagogy - not rocket science. Why is it so astounding ?
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
The whole point of it being inspired is that it is not conditioned by the limitations of the persons for whom it was for all generations intended.
You choose not to believe that the Bible and Word of God is accurate.
Luke 6:40 " A disciple is not above His teacher"
You seem in your words to believe that you are above the Holy Spirit Who wrote the Bible through men. Do you not believe that the Word of God is for all generations? If so, then you deny that the Holy Spirit is capable of speaking the Truth to all generations. Nor do you believe that He is capable of controlling the universe which He createdâŚthat He has to stay within the laws of scienceâŚwhich He created, but which He is not bound by. In Luke 8:22-25, Jesus calmed the storm. Was that something that science could explain? No. Science could not explain it in a million years. It has to be accepted by word of mouthâŚwhich it was until 300 years later when it was inspired by the Holy Spirit to be included in the Bible. Why believe that, yet not the story of Noah? What is so much more difficult for God to do in calming the storm and sea than in believing that He flooded the whole earth. We are talking about Godâs All Powerful Omnipotence.
Luke 8:53-54 âAnd they laughed at Him, knowing that she was dead. But taking her by the hand he called, saying âChild, ariseâ.â
They didnât believe Him. What He said made no sense to them. But He said it anyway, knowing that He would be laughed at and not believed. And His words were proven true. And the little girl was alive.
Luke 9:35 "And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, âThis is My Son, My Chosen; listen to Him!â ". Sounds like God wants us to listen to Him, Who is God along with HimselfâŚthe Almighty Father, and the Holy Spirit. Why would God want us to listen to Jesus and not to the inspired words of the Holy Spirit at other times? Doesnât make sense that He would want us to do that.
Luke 10:21 "In that same hour He rejoiced in the Holy Spirit (Who inspired the written Word of God), and said, âI thank Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou has hidden these things from the wise and understanding and has revealed them to babes; yea, father, for such was Thy gracious will.â " He spoke in other versus that we were to have the faith of a child if we were to enter into His Kingdom. The faith of a child is to believe without needing proof from science. The faith of a child is to believe what one has been told by the Words of God without demanding proof; and not having proof, to not doubt in the ability of God to do as He said He didâŚeven if we cannot fathom Him doing it.
Luke 11:28 "But He said, âBlessed rather are those who hear the Word of God and keep it!â "
Luke 11:29-30 âWhen the crowds were increasong, He began to say, âThis generation is an evil generation; it seeks a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah became a sign to the men of Nineveh, so will the Son of man be to this generation.â âŚ32 â The men of Nineveh will arise at the judgement with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is hereâ .â It sure does seem like Jesus was acknowledging the story of Jonah being in the whale as an actual event. How else do you explain that the men of Nineveh were converted and repented, or that Jesus compares what Jonah went through (being in the belly of the whale for three days) with what the people will see with His Own death and resurrection? It truly did not sound like an alagorical metaphor when Jesus presented it as an actual historical event. So, are you saying that Jesus lied?
John 6:52-61 "The Jews then diputed among themselves, saying, âHow can this man give us His Flesh to eat?â So Jesus said to them, âTruly, truly I say to you, unless you eate the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you; he who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is real food, and My blood is real drek. he who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me will live because of Me. this is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats This bread will live forever.â Many of the disciples, when they heard it, said, âThis is a hard saying; who can listen to it?â But Jesus, knowing in Himself that his disciples murmered at it, said to them, âDo you take offense at this?ââŚ66-68 After this manyof His disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. Jesus said to the twelve, âWill you also go away?â Simon answered Him, âLord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed and have come to know that you are the Holy One of God?â "
Just because it was difficult for many of His followers to understand at the time did not prevent Him from saying it. They were words not only for those men of that time, but for all of the generations of the world from that time on. He did not make it easier for them to understand by changing the words that would make it clear to them. He told the TRUTH.
So, why not make something much more difficult for people who were with Him to understand, but use mythology (which He forbids us to believe in) to explain something as simple as the story of Noah and the flood? He would not have lost the followers had He explained the Eucharist to His disciples. Yet, He didnât stray from the Truth. But you are saying that He told lies about Noah and the Flood because people back then couldnât understand the truth.
Tell me, what truth was it that they could not understand to such an extent that God had to lie about it? You have never explained the reason for the story of Noah to begin with. There are many stories in the OT to explain the horrors of sin and the consequences of it. So why would the Holy Spirit make up a lie to put in the Word of God, a lie that both Jesus and St. Peter relate to as an historical event? Such an important lie that Jesus and St. Peter would continue with the lie, why?
2 Peter 3:5 âThey diliberatly ignore this fact, that by the Word of God (Jesus) heavens existed long ago, and an earth formed out of water and by means of water, through which the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same Word (Jesus) the heavens and earth that now exist have been stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly me.â That was a testament of what was an actual historical event, and the foretelling of an actual future event.
And he referred to those that do not believe as scoffers. Definition of scoffers according to the New Testament is a FALSE TEACHER !!!
Not trying to offend anyoneâs hearts, but it sounds to me that you and those who argue on your side are what St. Peter was referring to as âscoffersâ.
I pray that you will seek the faith of a true believer in Christ and His Word, and His Church.
God bless you.
Hey Phillip and Buffalo. Youâve been doing a great job. Hope my postâŚwhich I prayed about before sitting down to typeâŚhelps in your endeavor to promote the Truth of the Word of God.
J
juliamajor
Guest
So God inspires people to write the bible to what? Prove how many people and creatures can fit or not fit on an ark and how much poo it can contain? Is that what is really important about these stories?Incidentals have become important while the storyâs lesson and truth get shanghied .What is Godâs truth in these stories? What is the import of the stories and what do they mean to us andto the people of the past.Godâs truth and scientific facts have little to do with one another.God doesnât inspire people to prove or disprove evolution or creationism; to prove or disprove Noah, or the Tower of Babel .When Godâs Spiritââ inspiresâ a sacred author what was it for? What did the prophets do who spoke with Godâs voice? there aim as Godâs aim is is to bring us to salvation, to bring us to a closer relationship with Him and with each other.Did the prophets concern themselves with trying to prove or disprove common scientific ideas of the time?No the world was as it was- their concern was with spiritual truths Truth doesnât change-facts do-science does, even cosmologies do. Peter and Jesus were both people of a specific time and place whoâs knowledge( science and facts) would be limited to what they knew and what they were taught. Thatâs not lying - thaâts just the limits of human knowledge that even Jesus in his human mind would be limited by.I doubt the HS would be concerned with the facts of a story but with the truth.We in the west are taught linear thinking that point A- leads to point b and c and etc. The Ancient Hebrews didnât think that way- notice timelines in OT and NT- they are hardly linear and often fluctuate back and forth.same in story tellingâŚAgain what is the point of the story? What is the point of the âJesus walking on the water?â What is the point of the Creation story,Noah, etc?And why is it important to humanity- then and now.? Stories in Genesis are not on the sameâhistoricâ par as Kings, Samuel,Exodus,Maccabees and the NT. Each book in the bible-even if the books need each other to explain the totality and unity of the Bible each book has to be viewed separately- not all are narratives. Didactic tales, poems pious novels,gospels, parables-etc.Big mistake to put Genesis in the the same genre of the Gospels or the epistles âŚIâm no youngster so Iâm very familiar with the way bible was viewed pre VII. I never was told that Genesis was literally true-I was never told to believe evolution was false.I canât help but feel that this is the influence of Fundamentalist Evangelicals on american catholicsâthe Tim Lahaying of catholic biblical study. where in the Bible is mythology forbidden- every nation and culture has them including the Jews and Americans.the trouble with myths is people in the civilization are not cognizant of the fact they are myths and myths are not same as lies.
P
peary
Guest
**Well, I guess she told us!So God inspires people to write the bible to what? Prove how many people and creatures can fit or not fit on an ark and how much poo it can contain? Is that what is really important about these stories?Incidentals have become important while the storyâs lesson and truth get shanghied .What is Godâs truth in these stories? What is the import of the stories and what do they mean to us andto the people of the past.Godâs truth and scientific facts have little to do with one another.God doesnât inspire people to prove or disprove evolution or creationism; to prove or disprove Noah, or the Tower of Babel .When Godâs Spiritââ inspiresâ a sacred author what was it for? What did the prophets do who spoke with Godâs voice? there aim as Godâs aim is is to bring us to salvation, to bring us to a closer relationship with Him and with each other.Did the prophets concern themselves with trying to prove or disprove common scientific ideas of the time?No the world was as it was- their concern was with spiritual truths Truth doesnât change-facts do-science does, even cosmologies do. Peter and Jesus were both people of a specific time and place whoâs knowledge( science and facts) would be limited to what they knew and what they were taught. Thatâs not lying - thaâts just the limits of human knowledge that even Jesus in his human mind would be limited by.I doubt the HS would be concerned with the facts of a story but with the truth.We in the west are taught linear thinking that point A- leads to point b and c and etc. The Ancient Hebrews didnât think that way- notice timelines in OT and NT- they are hardly linear and often fluctuate back and forth.same in story tellingâŚAgain what is the point of the story? What is the point of the âJesus walking on the water?â What is the point of the Creation story,Noah, etc?And why is it important to humanity- then and now.? Stories in Genesis are not on the sameâhistoricâ par as Kings, Samuel,Exodus,Maccabees and the NT. Each book in the bible-even if the books need each other to explain the totality and unity of the Bible each book has to be viewed separately- not all are narratives. Didactic tales, poems pious novels,gospels, parables-etc.Big mistake to put Genesis in the the same genre of the Gospels or the epistles âŚIâm no youngster so Iâm very familiar with the way bible was viewed pre VII. I never was told that Genesis was literally true-I was never told to believe evolution was false.I canât help but feel that this is the influence of Fundamentalist Evangelicals on american catholicsâthe Tim Lahaying of catholic biblical study. where in the Bible is mythology forbidden- every nation and culture has them including the Jews and Americans.the trouble with myths is people in the civilization are not cognizant of the fact they are myths and myths are not same as lies.
**
I hope the OP takes all this in 
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
God did not write it - men wrote it. And as men, they were limited. Creatures are - that is what distinguishes all creatures from God. And one of those limitations was that they wrote within a particular culture, with its limitations.
Genesis would have made no sense had it talked about DNA - as it does not, are we to take it that God hates DNA ? The Canaanites knew nothing of DNA, nor did any of Israelâs neighbours or enemies. Moses never forbade the study of DNA - it was no fault of Moses there was never an Israelite Watson and Crick to discover it. Since DNA, like the entire science of genetics, is a very recent development, books written before its discovery rather unsurprisingly do not refer to it. People talk about the discoveries & the technology that they are familiar with - the Israelites did. Why should that limit those who come later ?What you are doing is objectifying God, & objectifying inspiration. They are not objects in a display case to be pointed to, like the dead things some make them; they are unpredictable realities, which are supra-historical: not historical, & not discoverable by the methods proper to the study of things in creation. So they have no function in the study of the Bible, because the Bible can be studied either on its materal side, as an object within creation, or as a theological (& to that extent a supra-historical) reality. To understand its function for us, as Christians today, we have to start with its material reality & see it is as the set of Ancient Near Eastern Texts that it is, & once that is done, we can make Christian use of it. The readerâs gift of faith is irrelevant to what it is a body of ANE texts - the reader has to grasp the meaning of the texts, before he or she can apply them in faith to his or her daily life.
âBeliev[ing] that the Word of God is for all generationsâ is not the same as believing that God does not deal with His people according as they are. That He does so deal, was known to John Chrysostom, Aquinas, & Leo XIII among others. It is hardly a horrible modern novelty. Whatever the difficulties in it, it does at least not make a nonsense of the fact that most Jews & all Christians have come from much later cultures than that in which Gen.1-2 arose.
BTW, there are several creation myths in the Bible -such as that of JHWHâs fight with the monster Rahab. Do you believe He did fight that monster ? Itâs in the OT. Job 15 refers to the Primeval Man present at the Divine Council. Neither of these is in Genesis, so the Bible itself shows that the Genesis myths are not the only creation myths. If the Israelites could have alternative ideas on the creation, in the Bible itself, as part of it - by what logic is anyone else forbidden to ?Nothing Iâve said even implies this. So the rest of your comments are directed against an Aunt Sally of your own creation.
Science apart, it is not clear what in fact happened. The episode could easily be a legend or even an invention: theologically-motivated, to show that Jesus does the same things as God in the OT. This affects the status of the event in the episode - not the status of Jesus. The episodes in the four-fold Gospel are chosen to express in various ways Who Jesus is: they are nothing as ordinary as biography
Because flooding the whole earth requires all sorts of things to be the case that are not the case. The scale is entirely different. Calming a storm does not require two mammoths to be hosed in a large boar with a host of other animals; it does not require the vast mounds of their excreta to be removed; it does not put the smaller animals, such as porcupines or badgers, in danger of being suffocated by the massive piles of mammoth excreta - there were not mammoths,excreting or otherwise, on the Sea of Galilee; but there were mammoths when Noah is supposed to have had his Flood; & if it was both world-wide & the Flood of Genesis & if Fundamentalist methods of inspecting the text are valid: then there would mammoths. And all mammals need to excrete, even if they are in the Bible.
So the responsibility of shifting all that mammoth-manure is yours - you put it there with your interpretation of Noahâs Flood, so you can clear it up.God does not have to see to the feeding & watering & general health & freedon from lice & colic & any other diseases to which mammoths may be heir. If they had gippy tummies, Noah would have had to clean up after them - quite a job for a man of 600 years. If they panicked, or were depressed, or missed their (drowned) relatives, or had tusk-ache, or were in a bad temper - as well they might be, with all that foul weather - it would be Noah & Sons, not God, who had to attend to them. And N & Ss were not almighty: as Shem & Noah showed by dying (unless they lost their omnipotence (their super-powers ?) in the Flood.
A super-powered Noah could take care of all the problems in the Ark: incontinent mammoths, panicking horses, flattened money-spiders, tigers with tooth-ache, the lot. Put Clark Kent in the Ark, & all is âsortedâ; quickly too. An almighty Noah is not required - a Noah with the powers of the Man from Krypton (or those compatible with not being the Man of Steel) would do quite nicely, thank you very much.There is no way that you can prove he did not have such powers: accept that he did, & much is explained that was obscure. This is no more outlandish than your âargument from almightinessâ - the latter makes room for any daftness, provided that the daftness produces the results desired. Postulating a Superman-like Noah produces the results your argument desires; at the price of making the Bible ridiculous.
That God is almighty, does not relieve men of the need to act, or of the consequences of their actions. Noah still has to clean up after the mammoths - Godâs not going to. And if the world is not a world in which Noah cleans up mammoths, because they are not part of the menagerie assembled two by two or in sevens - the Bible gives both figures - on the Ark; & as the sole reason for thinking he does clean up after them is an interpretation of Noahâs Flood as world-wide; the Flood was not world-wide: unless other, stronger reasons show it was. And it seems that no such reason exists.
As for the rest of the post, there are different reasons for finding something incredible. In the comments on or following the passages quoted different reasons for doing so are being confused.
As to this:
Jesus N Cherie:
- there is a difference between a theological statement which cannot be tested by reason, so cannot be denied on rational grounds; & one which is not theological but geographical or historical or the like. Statements are of many kinds, & some are not as obviously false as others, or false in the same sense.
J
Jesus_N_Cherie
Guest
You dissenters are purposefully ignoring the truth and the point. You are trying to rationalize your attempts to discredit of Godâs Word. But spiritually you are failing, and will never succeed. You are denying that you are, by your denial of the Bible stories being accurate historical facts, calling God a liar. But you are failing in that also.
I proved in previous posts which quoted the words of Jesus, Who though true Man is also True God, discredits your points. When God was trying to make a point about something without historical accurate accounts, He said so.ie.parables
Who are you to say that God didnât do things exactly as the Bible tells us? As I have previously written, science changes constantly, but Godâs Word never changes. And He has had the enirety of time to change His words to us to tell us that His original Words were lies. Yet He tells us just the opposite, and He warns us of people like you who would try to destoy the Faith of people by your own interpretations. You would fall under the term âFalse prophetsâ, which are any who donât believe in God. And you canât tell me that your Faith is only about salvation. If that were so, you would believe in all of it, and would not be arguing with those who believe every story in HIS WORD is true and accurate. You are denying Who Jesus is by your words and your work. You are anti Bible, which makes you anti Christ, since it is Christâs Words and actions which make up the Bible. No where in Jesus words does it discredit the accuracy of the History of what the Word has always been. He referred to Jonah as an actual historical event. He didnât say, âlike the lie you have heard about Jonah, or the parable about Jonah.â He referred to the people of Nineveh that converted because of Jonah, who went to them because he was in the belly of a fish for three days, as being people who would be there on judgement day. Sounds like He was talking about real people and real events. You cannot explain that away. He knew we would take His words literally, and had every reason at that moment to give us what you believe is the truth, had your explanation been the truth. But your explanation is false.
Science has become your God, and Modernism your religion. You are not following Christ because you are trying to discredit HimâŚas He was with God at the time of CreationâŚCreation was made through the Word. Jesus is the Word.
Regardless of what you choose to believe, it does not take away Who and what God did with His own creation. And people in the time of Christ were just as capable as the people of today of accepting anything Jesus said. He didnât have to hide the Truth from themâŚas a matter of fact, in my last post I cited scripture versus which proves that He didnât shirk from being painfully honest with them, which caused many of His beloved disciples to stop following Him.
He is God, He is perfect. He can neither decieve nor be decieved. Which means that He could not have decieved the people whom He inspired in writing the Bible. If the story were false, or anything about it false, it would have been a deceptionâŚwhich He is incapable of. And there were no reasons for it.
Another problem with evolution is you believe that all past generations were stupid compared to this generation. It is this generation that is stupid, for it has produced people like you who doubt that the Word of God is truth.
Once more, I give my leave of this thread. I will not allow you to steal my peace again.
I proved in previous posts which quoted the words of Jesus, Who though true Man is also True God, discredits your points. When God was trying to make a point about something without historical accurate accounts, He said so.ie.parables
Who are you to say that God didnât do things exactly as the Bible tells us? As I have previously written, science changes constantly, but Godâs Word never changes. And He has had the enirety of time to change His words to us to tell us that His original Words were lies. Yet He tells us just the opposite, and He warns us of people like you who would try to destoy the Faith of people by your own interpretations. You would fall under the term âFalse prophetsâ, which are any who donât believe in God. And you canât tell me that your Faith is only about salvation. If that were so, you would believe in all of it, and would not be arguing with those who believe every story in HIS WORD is true and accurate. You are denying Who Jesus is by your words and your work. You are anti Bible, which makes you anti Christ, since it is Christâs Words and actions which make up the Bible. No where in Jesus words does it discredit the accuracy of the History of what the Word has always been. He referred to Jonah as an actual historical event. He didnât say, âlike the lie you have heard about Jonah, or the parable about Jonah.â He referred to the people of Nineveh that converted because of Jonah, who went to them because he was in the belly of a fish for three days, as being people who would be there on judgement day. Sounds like He was talking about real people and real events. You cannot explain that away. He knew we would take His words literally, and had every reason at that moment to give us what you believe is the truth, had your explanation been the truth. But your explanation is false.
Science has become your God, and Modernism your religion. You are not following Christ because you are trying to discredit HimâŚas He was with God at the time of CreationâŚCreation was made through the Word. Jesus is the Word.
Regardless of what you choose to believe, it does not take away Who and what God did with His own creation. And people in the time of Christ were just as capable as the people of today of accepting anything Jesus said. He didnât have to hide the Truth from themâŚas a matter of fact, in my last post I cited scripture versus which proves that He didnât shirk from being painfully honest with them, which caused many of His beloved disciples to stop following Him.
He is God, He is perfect. He can neither decieve nor be decieved. Which means that He could not have decieved the people whom He inspired in writing the Bible. If the story were false, or anything about it false, it would have been a deceptionâŚwhich He is incapable of. And there were no reasons for it.
Another problem with evolution is you believe that all past generations were stupid compared to this generation. It is this generation that is stupid, for it has produced people like you who doubt that the Word of God is truth.
Once more, I give my leave of this thread. I will not allow you to steal my peace again.
J
juliamajor
Guest
Dissenter? From what? If God didnât want us to discuss His words so that it is ever alive-He wouldnât have given us a brain to reason with.If there were no arguments and no discussion about scripture it would be dead- do you want it to die?Jewish scholars have argued and discussed scripture for thousands of years and they believe that because the Torah is alive that every generation finds something new.something that is relevant to each generation. The Torah the Neviim and the Kethuvim- are renewed and 'rediscovered â with every new human brain which wishes to study it.Discredit Godâs Word? I teach it and have taught it for many years now- I read it, I study it and I hope I live it.As far as denying historicity. NOT EVERY BOOK OF THE BIBLE IS A HISTORY NOR WAS IT MEANT TO BE TAKEN AS SUCH!Have you read the Sumerian Creation stories, or the Epic of Gilgamish , or the Atraharis or any of the Creation or Flood stories? If you did you would see many familiar archetypes, images similar to to the Biblical accounts but which preceded the biblical accounts by thousands of years. Does that diminish Godâs word? Of course not. because the differences in the tales are the important part- Godâs love of .His creatures and His creation are unique in the ancient world . and God didnât âwriteâ the Bible -man did- INSPIRED by the HS. Do you think that God so despises His creation that He would use His authors like robots, computers or was it by some heaven version of 'automatic writing"? No . God respects our minds, our spirits our thought processes and yes, even our flaws(re:Jacob, Peter and whole flock)to bring about His will.Not every CF who commented on Scripture agreed with each other- many were at odds . Because there was disagreements does that negate our further investigation of Scripture? should we stop studying it- should biblical studies be banned- should schools of biblical theology be frozen? Should we burn âDei Verbumâ or rip Divino Spiritu Afflante into little pieces because it doesnât coincide with your view of Scripture?I hate to tellyou Jesus wa and is True God and true Man but on this earth he dealt with a human brain and was limited in his human knowledge- look at theology if you donât believe me. Your view is so narrow- either itâs history or itâs parable- sorry lady . There is more to language and writing then just history or parable and Jesus used them all because he was no dummy. Just because something is or isnât historical doesnât make it more true or less true .You narrow God;s greatness when you narrow His word.The problem is you equate history with truth& truth with history. Some things are so lost in the mids of time that there is no possibility of it being historical. Creation and flood were pre history-nobody was there to take notes. Ah, you say but God was there- of course but to think that Godâs main concern in inspiring Scripture is to promote an historical view of Creation? Folly. How incredibly arrogant of you to assume that you have the inside track with God , that you are one of the faithful remnant!The Church in itâs wonderful Wisdom doesnât assume to tells us line by line what scripture means and how it should be interpreted.But apparently you have a higher authority.Church does the smart thing and concerns itself with salvation and how to get it and doesnât worry about how many animals could fit on an ark! As far as being a False Prophet- phew- A prophet is anyone who speaks FOR God. I donât even think anything close to that. I speak for myself and what I have learned. If You want to want someone one thinks they speak for God - You better look in the mirror. Anti Christ Anti Bible- i hand out Bibles- i donât try to narrow God down to my puny train of thought or my prejudices or my dislikes. Jonahâs story is a perfect example - I suggest you reread it and study what it really says instead of worrying about historicity (hate to tell you but there are historic mistakes from the very beginning concerning time and place) You take salvation history as if it were history history- dealing with politics and the price of goats and who invented the cotton gin! Truth is Eternal but the way we pass on the truth can be varied- it can be told in stories and poems didactic novels and any way God chooses- not in ways we are comfortable with. If Scripture makes you feel all warm and fuzzy and comfortable about yourself then you are not reading it right. It should make you think, consider and do. It should change your life or else alter your ways in some manner It should be thought , consider ,studied and discussed. It shouldânât lie gathering dust because your to afraid or too set in your ways to gain more out of it or you are to settled in your own view of the truth. Again Study 'Jonah" it is a many layered story that has become a kiddie tale. peace
- Status