|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 8:38:13 AM
|
|
|
HisCovenant
Posts: 4334
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Contextually, that scripture is speaking of God's Judgement that was enacted on the Babylonians for their sins during a time of war. It is not speaking of infanticide, but rather war where infanticide had been inacted by the Babylonians and they would be repaid in a like manner. Furthermore, it is not a command or suggestion that infanticide is right behavior, but rather a statement of fact.
_____________________________
-HisCovenant/ Zipporah
My friends call me Zippy!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 3:50:14 PM
|
|
|
SavedByGraceMD
Posts: 899
Joined: 2/13/2008
From: the poconos
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: RefinersMetal
Do you believe the Old Testament? Do you believe it literally?
I was watching Joe Rogan talk about Noah's Ark and it has been really tempting me to doubt
some of the OT events. Thanks for your thoughts.
Joe Rogan talked about Noahs Ark. The same guy form the UFC. I wouldn't take what he says to mean diddly. I don't know what he said, but if it is along the same lines as James Camerons OT special and the tomb of Jesus special, it obviously would be worthless drivel. I would just pay attention to who you are listening to when you are getting biblical interpretations.
As to your question, yes I believe it as it is written. What is literal is literal, what is figurative is figurative and what is prophetical is prophetical. I believe the bible to be the inspired word of almighty God, so I take it at its word.
_____________________________
Isaiah 41:10
"Fear not for I am with you,
Do not be dismayed for I am your God,
I will strengthen you and help you,
I will uphold you with my righteous right hand"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 4:09:14 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
quote:
ORIGINAL: RefinersMetal
Do you believe the Old Testament? Do you believe it literally?
I was watching Joe Rogan talk about Noah's Ark and it has been really tempting me to doubt
some of the OT events. Thanks for your thoughts.
Joe Rogan talked about Noahs Ark. The same guy form the UFC. I wouldn't take what he says to mean diddly. I don't know what he said, but if it is along the same lines as James Camerons OT special and the tomb of Jesus special, it obviously would be worthless drivel. I would just pay attention to who you are listening to when you are getting biblical interpretations.
As to your question, yes I believe it as it is written. What is literal is literal, what is figurative is figurative and what is prophetical is prophetical. I believe the bible to be the inspired word of almighty God, so I take it at its word.
When the Tomb of Jesus was announced, I found it disturbing that no picture of the claimed inscription was released. I eventually found a real photograph of the inscription (and not the faked one that was put in the press release), and realized immediately that it did not even say what was being claimed. Their exclusion of real photographs was just a way for them propagate their lie.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 4:17:30 PM
|
|
|
SavedByGraceMD
Posts: 899
Joined: 2/13/2008
From: the poconos
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
quote:
ORIGINAL: RefinersMetal
Do you believe the Old Testament? Do you believe it literally?
I was watching Joe Rogan talk about Noah's Ark and it has been really tempting me to doubt
some of the OT events. Thanks for your thoughts.
Joe Rogan talked about Noahs Ark. The same guy form the UFC. I wouldn't take what he says to mean diddly. I don't know what he said, but if it is along the same lines as James Camerons OT special and the tomb of Jesus special, it obviously would be worthless drivel. I would just pay attention to who you are listening to when you are getting biblical interpretations.
As to your question, yes I believe it as it is written. What is literal is literal, what is figurative is figurative and what is prophetical is prophetical. I believe the bible to be the inspired word of almighty God, so I take it at its word.
When the Tomb of Jesus was announced, I found it disturbing that no picture of the claimed inscription was released. I eventually found a real photograph of the inscription (and not the faked one that was put in the press release), and realized immediately that it did not even say what was being claimed. Their exclusion of real photographs was just a way for them propagate their lie.
Not to mention that Jesus, and the other names like Mary that were supposedly inscribed on the box, were just so extremely common at the time. There may have been hundreds of boxes with those names inscribed on them.
But again, my point is, we need to watch where we get our information from. If someone like Joe Rogan can make you doubt, you need to take it to the Lord, and ask Him to help you with your doubts.
"Lord I believe, but help my unbelief".
_____________________________
Isaiah 41:10
"Fear not for I am with you,
Do not be dismayed for I am your God,
I will strengthen you and help you,
I will uphold you with my righteous right hand"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 4:23:02 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
quote:
ORIGINAL: RefinersMetal
Do you believe the Old Testament? Do you believe it literally?
I was watching Joe Rogan talk about Noah's Ark and it has been really tempting me to doubt
some of the OT events. Thanks for your thoughts.
Joe Rogan talked about Noahs Ark. The same guy form the UFC. I wouldn't take what he says to mean diddly. I don't know what he said, but if it is along the same lines as James Camerons OT special and the tomb of Jesus special, it obviously would be worthless drivel. I would just pay attention to who you are listening to when you are getting biblical interpretations.
As to your question, yes I believe it as it is written. What is literal is literal, what is figurative is figurative and what is prophetical is prophetical. I believe the bible to be the inspired word of almighty God, so I take it at its word.
When the Tomb of Jesus was announced, I found it disturbing that no picture of the claimed inscription was released. I eventually found a real photograph of the inscription (and not the faked one that was put in the press release), and realized immediately that it did not even say what was being claimed. Their exclusion of real photographs was just a way for them propagate their lie.
Not to mention that Jesus, and the other names like Mary that were supposedly inscribed on the box, were just so extremely common at the time. There may have been hundreds of boxes with those names inscribed on them.
But again, my point is, we need to watch where we get our information from. If someone like Joe Rogan can make you doubt, you need to take it to the Lord, and ask Him to help you with your doubts.
"Lord I believe, but help my unbelief".
The fact that all of the names were extremely common is something that was also an issue; however, I think the bigger issue was that it was highly doubtful that the name itself was even correct at all. Not only did they have to play games with the statistics to make the argument plausible, they first had to play games with the inscription to make it even possible.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 4:35:06 PM
|
|
|
SavedByGraceMD
Posts: 899
Joined: 2/13/2008
From: the poconos
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
quote:
ORIGINAL: RefinersMetal
Do you believe the Old Testament? Do you believe it literally?
I was watching Joe Rogan talk about Noah's Ark and it has been really tempting me to doubt
some of the OT events. Thanks for your thoughts.
Joe Rogan talked about Noahs Ark. The same guy form the UFC. I wouldn't take what he says to mean diddly. I don't know what he said, but if it is along the same lines as James Camerons OT special and the tomb of Jesus special, it obviously would be worthless drivel. I would just pay attention to who you are listening to when you are getting biblical interpretations.
As to your question, yes I believe it as it is written. What is literal is literal, what is figurative is figurative and what is prophetical is prophetical. I believe the bible to be the inspired word of almighty God, so I take it at its word.
When the Tomb of Jesus was announced, I found it disturbing that no picture of the claimed inscription was released. I eventually found a real photograph of the inscription (and not the faked one that was put in the press release), and realized immediately that it did not even say what was being claimed. Their exclusion of real photographs was just a way for them propagate their lie.
Not to mention that Jesus, and the other names like Mary that were supposedly inscribed on the box, were just so extremely common at the time. There may have been hundreds of boxes with those names inscribed on them.
But again, my point is, we need to watch where we get our information from. If someone like Joe Rogan can make you doubt, you need to take it to the Lord, and ask Him to help you with your doubts.
"Lord I believe, but help my unbelief".
The fact that all of the names were extremely common is something that was also an issue; however, I think the bigger issue was that it was highly doubtful that the name itself was even correct at all. Not only did they have to play games with the statistics to make the argument plausible, they first had to play games with the inscription to make it even possible.
I know, it is pretty pathetic what they tried to do. The problem is that people buy into it. It seems that the bigger the lie, the more people get deceived.
_____________________________
Isaiah 41:10
"Fear not for I am with you,
Do not be dismayed for I am your God,
I will strengthen you and help you,
I will uphold you with my righteous right hand"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 5:03:53 PM
|
|
|
Shrommer
Posts: 99
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
When Genesis says that the flood covered the whole earth, I think it meant that it literally covered the whole earth as far as the eye could see, from Noah's perspective. I don't believe it means the whole planet earth that we think of today as viewed from a satellite. What is written is what was truly seen and heard, but the people who saw and heard the events did not have the scientific mindset that Western culture uses to understand and describe events.
It is hard to talk about "The Old Testament" in blanket terms. The books of Jonah and Job may or may not be historical accounts. They could just be written as object lessons and the stages from which to share us wise truths about life and the nature of God and man.
There is no reason to doubt the miracles in the Bible. I recommend the film "Exodus Decoded" if you want an example of how many accounts of the Bible can be understood through modern science, even though the people of the day did not understand them in that way. Even if we accept an understanding like that, we can still see a miracle in the way God coordinated events, timed them, and foresaw them. The ten plagues were used in a very purposeful design, and God executed the whole series in a perfect way planned out from the beginning of time. God made a way to fulfill His purpose and rescue Israel from Egypt with a mighty hand!
"Exodus Decoded" is by the same producers that made the movie about finding Jesus' tomb. They are Jewish, so they sought to prove the Exodus account yet disprove the resurrection account. They do a great job of researching Exodus, even though I think they're full of hot air about finding the bones of Jesus.
It is hilarious to say that they found Jesus' bones and have the DNA tests to prove it. Whose DNA do you compare it to?
Here's a quick joke: They know that they found Jesus' bones, because inside the urn was a bracelet made of plastic rubber, with the initials WWID inscribed on them ... "What would I do?"
< Message edited by Shrommer -- 9/18/2008 5:18:35 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 5:47:55 PM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 2436
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Shrommer
When Genesis says that the flood covered the whole earth, I think it meant that it literally covered the whole earth as far as the eye could see, from Noah's perspective.
Have you ever seen this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZyoXQJ5Al0
LG
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 6:17:37 PM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 2436
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
I know, it is pretty pathetic what they tried to do. The problem is that people buy into it. It seems that the bigger the lie, the more people get deceived.
Greetings,
quote:
The problem is that people buy into it. It seems that the bigger the lie, the more people get deceived.
According to the principal in Matt 24:24
Mt 24:24
For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
The key to that deception has nothing to do with His own… by the words …if possible, that is an expression of the Messiahs Faith in His elect, and in that context... it means… it is not possible to deceive the elect according to Joh 10:28.
That deception and those who are falling for it has already been ordained beforehand…and those who are being deceived suggest clearly that they are not His (according to the above).... and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it;
Time is closing quickly and we need to concentrate on those whom God “is” drawing to Christ ...not those whom God is preparing for the day of wrath, because He is not going to answer it.
LG
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/18/2008 9:35:31 PM
|
|
|
x_SoliDeoGloria_x
Posts: 159
Joined: 9/3/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
What is literal is literal, what is figurative is figurative and what is prophetical is prophetical.
The question arises, "Who gets to decide?"
For example, some people insist that the creation account was intended to be taken literally, and others insist that it was intended to be taken figuratively.
I think a quote from the Westminster Confession is applicable to this discussion: All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all: yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.
Is the question of whether God created the cosmos in six days vs fourteen billion years something which is "necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation?" Personally, I don't think so. I'm content to have the literalists and the figurativists hold to their own opinion on the age of the cosmos, and I'm not going to question anyone's salvation based on which side they are on regarding this particular issue.
_____________________________
"Not by work going before grace shall I deserve grace, nor by my work following grace shall I deserve eternal life; but to him that believes, sin is pardoned and righteousness imputed." -- Martin Luther
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 1:01:42 AM
|
|
|
ot4christ
Posts: 31
Joined: 8/29/2008
Status: offline
|
The Bible says the earth is a flat circle (circles are always flat) and sits on water (Isaiah 40, Ps 136) and that the earth doesn't move (1 Chron 16), after all the sun stood still, not the earth (Josh 10). Science says that the earth is a sphere and it moves around the sun. What should we believe, science or the bible? I believe both. As for "light in transit" created to appear old, how does one account for the recently observed supernova (exploding stars)?
Dan, thanks for sticking out your neck likely knowing you would be "flamed." A person named Dan witnessed to me when I was an atheist in college. At the time, my biggest obstacle to faith in the bible was the 144-hour creation story. I was an astronomy buff from the age of 11 and it's not like I could flip a switch and say, "Oh yeah, the heavens are only 6000-10,000 years old." That's no more possible, in my opinion, than a geocentric cosmos. Anyway, this person shared that the "days" could mean "ages." That was the only debate I didn't pursue with a Christian as an athiest. I was born again a couple of weeks later.
-----------------------------------
There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon …But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must . . . invent something special, and the way he does it must be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth.”
--Martin Luther
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 1:06:26 AM
|
|
|
Covaan_Meshuga
Posts: 3576
Joined: 6/8/2005
From: a mother who let me live
Status: offline
|
What you need to learn is the difference between poetic writings of the Bible and the rest of the writings.
_____________________________
Abiyah
"Ladies and gentlemen, there are things that you will only be able to learn by the weakest among us, and when you snuff them out, you are the one that loses." ~~Gianna Jesson, 1977 LA, CA, saline abortion survivor
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 1:17:30 AM
|
|
|
mikeman2
Posts: 280
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PopsiLufsJesus
I believe it, but I am not a complete literalist!
Yes.
Now in terms of evidence, I would point your attention to ALL ancient cultures in that region that have a flood myth. Of course, not any of the flood stories are exactly alike, but they all point to a massive flood in the region. In addition, you must realize that the stories in the Bible are based upon fact. For example, the only scientific discipline that is based upon a religious text is Biblical archaeology. Of course, these are not religious zealots, rather, these are scientists that recognize the historical truth behind the stories in the Bible.
_____________________________
Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on.
-Winston Churchill.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 7:41:11 AM
|
|
|
ot4christ
Posts: 31
Joined: 8/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Covaan_Meshuga
What you need to learn is the difference between poetic writings of the Bible and the rest of the writings.
If this is rersponse to my comment, thank you for the Christ-like reply. However, last I read, Joshua and Chronicles are not poetry. People can be as literal as they want to be. I do take the bible literaly but accept that the correct interpretation or our understanding may change. Surely, if Luther were still alive, he would accept that the earth does indeed move, or maybe not. It's hard to educate the dogmatic theologion.
--------------
"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances,... and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, lest the unbeliever see only ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn...Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. (1 Timothy 1.7)"
- St. Augustine, (A.D. 354-430), The Literal Meaning of Genesis
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 9:29:00 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 1938
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mikeman2
quote:
ORIGINAL: PopsiLufsJesus
I believe it, but I am not a complete literalist!
Yes.
Now in terms of evidence, I would point your attention to ALL ancient cultures in that region that have a flood myth. Of course, not any of the flood stories are exactly alike, but they all point to a massive flood in the region. In addition, you must realize that the stories in the Bible are based upon fact. For example, the only scientific discipline that is based upon a religious text is Biblical archaeology. Of course, these are not religious zealots, rather, these are scientists that recognize the historical truth behind the stories in the Bible.
AFAIK, few people would have a problem with the idea that there could have been a devastating flood somewhere in the middle east some 4000-6000 years ago. But a global flood is so much larger in scope that clear evidence of it would be slapping us in the face every single day.
But it isn't.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 10:06:55 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ot4christ
quote:
ORIGINAL: Covaan_Meshuga
What you need to learn is the difference between poetic writings of the Bible and the rest of the writings.
If this is rersponse to my comment, thank you for the Christ-like reply. However, last I read, Joshua and Chronicles are not poetry. People can be as literal as they want to be. I do take the bible literaly but accept that the correct interpretation or our understanding may change. Surely, if Luther were still alive, he would accept that the earth does indeed move, or maybe not. It's hard to educate the dogmatic theologion.
--------------
"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances,... and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, lest the unbeliever see only ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn...Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. (1 Timothy 1.7)"
- St. Augustine, (A.D. 354-430), The Literal Meaning of Genesis
You, are correct that Joshua and Chronicles are not poetry; however, the question that needs to be asked is would the original readers have understood the same implications from what was written? Too many English readers demand from the bible a preciseness of thought that would have been foreign to the original readers. The quote you provided from Augustine, similar quotes from Origen, or even quotes of the OT by New Testiment authors, all demonstrate the latitude with which the Scripture was understood by the early church. Extrapolating, as doctrine, from Joshua the idea the earth stood still and sun revolved around the earth is something that would have been very unlikely done by the original audience that Joshua addressed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 10:10:42 AM
|
|
|
zoebob
Posts: 8783
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: land of limbo
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ta_mosquito
From the perspective of Joshua and the other biblical writers, the sun DID stand still. When you see a pretty sunrise, do you say, "Oh! What a beautiful earth rotation!"? No - you call it a "sunrise" and say that the sun rises, although you know that it doesn't. Why? Because it's from your perspective on earth.
I don't consider the sun standing still, land on the waters stuff to be anti-science anymore than I consider calling it a sunset or sunrise to be against science.
Exactly
_____________________________
L-R: DD1, Ellies DS2, DD2, Ellies DS1
L-R: Ellies DD1, Ellies DD2, DS, Ellies DS3
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 10:17:14 AM
|
|
|
enriquespappa
Posts: 1
Joined: 9/23/2008
Status: offline
|
My biggest pet peave is how these scientist types want to explain away what the Bible says. The Discovery Channel or a similar channel had a series dealing with the warriors of the Bible. They had my attention. They lost it when they told us that Moses caused the children of Israel to steal from the Egyptians and that this was why Pharaoh went after them.
Exodus 12:35-36 KJV
35.And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment:
36.And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.
Here God gave the Egyptians a kind heart towards the Israelites and caused them to give them these gifts. The latter part of vs. 36 though uses the word "spoil" that causes people to stumble. We think of the "spoils of war" and give the same definition to this word also. The NKJV, NASB, NIV and several other translations are even worse because it uses the word "plundered". This implies that the children of Israel robbed the Egyptians at sword point and this is the version that the Discovery Channel showed. They miss the point that God gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians. Why would God do this and then allow His children to steal? God is not a thief and does not condone theivery and yet this verse alone implies that this was His commandment.
As Christians, we need to stand firm against the worldy view of God and His Bible. I believe all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Timothy 3:16) If one verse is there because man wanted to add it then I believe that the curse of Revelations 22:19 will be added to that person. "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. "
I know that this is a long way of getting to my answer of the question and I want to apologize for preaching but this is who God made me to be. So YES I believe the Old Testament literally.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 10:49:22 AM
|
|
|
PolarBear
Posts: 661
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Moving to San Antonio!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ta_mosquito
From the perspective of Joshua and the other biblical writers, the sun DID stand still.
This is exactly right -- perspective. A lot of "hyper-literalists" seem to miss that. Perspective must be gleaned from the context of the passage.
For example, Noah's flood. God clearly says that the purpose of the flood is to wipe out a generation of desperately wicked sinners. People only lived in a relatively small area in that day. The flood account is written from Noah's perspective. To think, then, that it is from the perspective of a weather satellite orbiting the earth seems rather absurd.
Same in Genesis 1. People seem to think it is from a universal perspective, regarding the creation of light and the stars and all that. However, verse 2 clearly puts the perspective on the surface of the earth. On day/era 1 the light appears, and on day/era 4 the sun and stars appear. This is completely consistent with scientific models showing an early earth with a thick, heavy atmosphere that dissipates as the eons roll on. Add to that the fact that days 1 and 4 do not contain the Hebrew words for ex-nihilo creation. "Let there be" light is the Hebrew word for "let appear, be visible." Same in day 4 for the sun, moon, and stars. The parenthetical note in day 4 ("God made the sun and moon, he also made the stars") is a different form, but still not ex-nihilo, but rather God forming them out of pre-existing material. It is also in a past tense that grammatically could have been accomplished before day 4.
For that reason I am completely confident that the "standard" scientific model of earth's formation is compatible with a literal reading of the Bible. Just not the way hyper-literalists think. 
ot4christ: Thanks, I enjoyed your perspective and your quotes. As I am interested in apologetics to atheists, it would be interesting to hear more about the arguments that caused your conversion. But I guess that's for another thread.
_____________________________
My current ministry dream:
http://victorymuseum.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Believe the Old Testament? Literally? - 9/23/2008 10:55:16 AM
|
|
|
Covaan_Meshuga
Posts: 3576
Joined: 6/8/2005
From: a mother who let me live
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ot4christ
quote:
ORIGINAL: Covaan_Meshuga
What you need to learn is the difference between poetic writings of the Bible and the rest of the writings.
If this is rersponse to my comment, thank you for the Christ-like reply. However, last I read, Joshua and Chronicles are not poetry. People can be as literal as they want to be. I do take the bible literaly but accept that the correct interpretation or our understanding may change. Surely, if Luther were still alive, he would accept that the earth does indeed move, or maybe not. It's hard to educate the dogmatic theologion.
Yes, in response to your post, but the "you" being general, not you yourself. But indeed, Hebrews often write as we write, with poetry and poetics incorporated into the writings, while the writings are not themselves "poetry."
By the way, welcome to Crosswalk!
_____________________________
Abiyah
"Ladies and gentlemen, there are things that you will only be able to learn by the weakest among us, and when you snuff them out, you are the one that loses." ~~Gianna Jesson, 1977 LA, CA, saline abortion survivor
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
