Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'interpretation'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Christian Discussions
    • Study Group
    • General Discussion
    • Bible Study
    • Theology
    • Apologetics
    • Prophecy
    • Do you want to just ask a question?
    • Christian Culture
    • Everything Else
  • Videos
    • General
    • News
    • Comedy
    • Biblical Topics
    • Christian Music
  • Current News
    • Most Interesting News Developments
    • Worthy Briefs
    • World News
    • Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
    • U.S. News
    • Christian News
    • Worthy Watch / Worthy Insights
  • Worthy Ministries
    • Worthy Devotions
    • What's the latest with the Worthy Ministries?
  • Who's on the Lord side?'s Topics
  • Cooking club's Smokers & related recipes/techniques
  • Cooking club's What's your favorite recipe?
  • Cooking club's Salads - not just lettuce!
  • Cooking club's Soups and Stews
  • Cooking club's About Multi-cookers - features, tips, recipes
  • Cooking club's Taters!
  • Cooking club's Bread
  • Gardening.'s Gardening Club Forum
  • Photography How To (tips and tricks)'s Photography Club Topics
  • Maker's Club's Club News
  • Maker's Club's So, what do you make, what have you made?
  • Maker's Club's Physical Art, specifically!
  • Maker's Club's Life hacks & tips - useful things you know & have tried!
  • Bible 365's Misc. Things of interest
  • Bible 365's THE DAILY READING (see reading schedule)
  • Bible 365's Todays' Reading
  • Bible 365's Recently added or updated
  • Bible 365's Bible Trivia
  • Bible 365's Table of Contents
  • Bible 365's Tightly Moderated Discussions-Some Controversial
  • Bible 365's Specific Doctrines
  • Bible 365's WorthyChat Bible Studies
  • Bible 365's Bible Topics - Looking at the Bible Topically
  • Reading Club's Topics
  • Bible Trivia's Index to Bible Trivia and Answers
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Answers
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Quizzes
  • Bible Trivia's Announcements
  • Puzzle Club's Forums
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Resources
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Forums
  • Songs of Praise Poetry Club's Forums
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Lessons
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Testimonies
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's 12 Steps and Biblical Comparison
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Forums
  • Diabetes and Low Carb Eating Support Group's Diabetes
  • Diabetes and Low Carb Eating Support Group's Low Carb Eating
  • Triumph Over Cancer's General topics
  • Triumph Over Cancer's Encouragement
  • Triumph Over Cancer's Tips and advice
  • Cat Chat's Information concerning cats and their servants
  • Cat Chat's Misc. unCATegorized cat things
  • Cat Chat's Our Feline Babies!
  • Gardening Club's Topics
  • Baking club's Miscellaneous
  • Baking club's sponge cakes
  • Bible - Daily Reading's Introduction
  • Bible - Daily Reading's 2023 Bible Reading Schedule
  • Deeper Discourse's Forum

Christian Blogs

  • traveller - Standing in the Wind
  • The Treasure In The Field
  • For the Love of God
  • Keys to the Kingdom
  • To Him be the Glory
  • Marathoner's Blog
  • Leonardo’s Blog
  • Word Studies Relating to Destiny
  • Searching the Scriptures.
  • Thought and Reflection
  • WilliamL's Worthy Insights
  • Marilyn's Messages
  • Bible Study Series
  • Albert Finch Ministry
  • Devotions
  • League of Savage Gentlemen.
  • ~~Angels Thoughts~~
  • A Desert Sage ?
  • Omegaman's Thought and Rants
  • Some Thoughts from AyinJade
  • Insights into Worthy Ministries
  • Bible 365's Reading Schedule - Click Read More to see
  • Bible 365's Basic Instructions
  • Bible Trivia's Guidelines
  • Songs of Praise Poetry Club's My Songs to the Lord

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Location


Interests

Found 6 results

  1. I view (1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) bible passage as a Warning for Christians to Not idolize and/or Not to worship the practice of looking for a Christian spouse. ( 1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) 25 Now concerning virgins I have no command of the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who [a]by the mercy of the Lord is trustworthy. 26 I think then that this is good in view of the present distress, that it is good for a man [c]to remain as he is.27 Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 28 But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have [d]trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you. 29 But this I say, brethren, the time has been shortened, so that from now on those who have wives should be as though they had none; 30 and those who weep, as though they did not weep; and those who rejoice, as though they did not rejoice; and those who buy, as though they did not possess; 31 and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away. However, I'm trying to reconcile ( 1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) bible passage warning with the following biblical narratives -Jacob & Rachel's Love Story, and their ensuing Relatively Happy marriage -David & Michal's relationship, and their ensuing failed marriage Let's start off with Jacob & Rachel's Love Story. The (Genesis 29:9-12) bible passage seems to show Jacob letting his loving emotions for Rachel get the better of him by -being so eager to roll the stone from the mouth of the well so that Rachel's sheep can drink water -, and how he embraced Rachel by kissing her, and lifted his voice and wept -Furthermore, (Genesis 29:15-20) states that "Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her" Essentially, what I'm trying to emphasize in listing out the aforementioned points is that Jacob seems to have gone against (1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) bible passage Warning Against idolizing and/or worshipping the practice of looking for a spouse because Jacob let's his loving emotions for Rachel get the better of him. Moreover, despite Jacob's initial actions, he goes on to have a reasonably successful marriage with Rachel. Genesis 29:4-12 (NASB) 4 Jacob said to them, “My brothers, where are you from?” And they said, “We are from Haran.” 5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?” And they said, “We know him.” 6 And he said to them, “Is it well with him?” And they said, “It is well, and here is Rachel his daughter coming with the sheep.” 7 He said, “Behold, it is still high day; it is not time for the livestock to be gathered. Water the sheep, and go, pasture them.” 8 But they said, “We cannot, until all the flocks are gathered, and they roll the stone from the mouth of the well; then we water the sheep.” 9 While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep, for she was a shepherdess. 10 When Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, Jacob went up and rolled the stone from the mouth of the well and watered the flock of Laban his mother’s brother. 11 Then Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted his voice and wept. 12 Jacob told Rachel that he was a [c]relative of her father and that he was Rebekah’s son, and she ran and told her father. Genesis 29:15-20 New American Standard Bible 1995 15 Then Laban said to Jacob, “Because you are my [a]relative, should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages be?” 16 Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the older was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. 17 And Leah’s eyes were weak, but Rachel was beautiful of form and face. 18 Now Jacob loved Rachel, so he said, “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel.” 19 Laban said, “It is better that I give her to you than to give her to another man; stay with me.” 20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her. Now let's try to analyze David & Michal's relationship which ultimately led to a failed marriage. David initial actions seems to be more aligned to (1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) bible passage Warning Against idolizing and/or worshipping the practice of looking for a spouse because David responds to the different marriage proposal by stating for following: -For Merab's marriage proposal, he says, (1 Samuel 18:18) But David said to Saul, “Who am I, and what is my life or my father’s family in Israel, that I should be the king’s son-in-law?” -And initially for Michal's marriage proposal, he says, (1 Samuel 18:23) ...But David said, “Is it trivial in your sight to become the king’s son-in-law, since I am a poor man and lightly esteemed?” I mentioned the aforementioned points about David because David is cautious about getting married to one of the king's daughters which seems wise & cautious, and therefore, seems to align with (1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) bible passage. However, even though David is at first cautious about Michal's marriage proposal, he ultimately accepts Michal as a wife. But, it's sad & strange that despite David's cautiousness which could be seen as being wisefully thoughtful about Michal's proposal, their marriage is a failure because we can read about the breakdown in (2 Samuel 6:16-23) bible passage that shows Michal's spite for David's dancing leaping and dancing in order to celebrate the return of the ark of The Lord. Ultimately, Michal mocks David face-to-face, and then ends up having No children for the rest of her life. (1 Samuel 18:17-27) 17 Then Saul said to David, “Here is my older daughter Merab; I will give her to you as a wife, only be a valiant man for me and fight the Lord’s battles.” ....more scripture.............18 But David said to Saul, “Who am I, and what is my life or my father’s family in Israel, that I should be the king’s son-in-law?” 19 So it came about at the time when Merab, Saul’s daughter, should have been given to David, that she was given to Adriel the Meholathite for a wife. 20 Now Michal, Saul’s daughter, loved David. When they told Saul, the thing was agreeable [a]to him. ....more scripture.............Therefore Saul said to David, “For a second time you may be my son-in-law today.” 22 Then Saul commanded his servants, “Speak to David secretly, saying, ‘Behold, the king delights in you, and all his servants love you; now therefore, become the king’s son-in-law.’” 23 So Saul’s servants spoke these words to David. But David said, “Is it trivial in your sight to become the king’s son-in-law, since I am a poor man and lightly esteemed?” 24 The servants of Saul reported to him [c]according to these words which David spoke. 25 Saul then said, “Thus you shall say to David, ‘The king does not desire any dowry except a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to take vengeance on the king’s enemies.’” Now Saul planned to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. 26 When his servants told David these words, [d]it pleased David to become the king’s son-in-law. [e]Before the days had expired 27 David rose up and went, he and his men, and struck down two hundred men among the Philistines. Then David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full number to the king, that he might become the king’s son-in-law. So Saul gave him Michal his daughter for a wife. 2 Samuel 6:16-23, New American Standard Bible (NASB) 16 Then it happened as the ark of the Lord came into the city of David that Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the Lord; and she despised him in her heart. 17 So they brought in the ark of the Lord and set it in its place inside the tent which David had pitched for it; and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. 18 When David had finished offering the burnt offering and the peace offering, he blessed the people in the name of the Lord of hosts. 19 Further, he distributed to all the people, to all the multitude of Israel, both to men and women, a cake of bread and one of dates and one of raisins to each one. Then all the people departed each to his house. 20 But when David returned to bless his household, Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said, “How the king of Israel distinguished himself today! He uncovered himself today in the eyes of his servants’ maids as one of the foolish ones shamelessly uncovers himself!” 21 So David said to Michal, “It was before the Lord, who chose me above your father and above all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the Lord, over Israel; therefore I will celebrate before the Lord. 22 I will be more lightly esteemed than this and will be humble in my own eyes, but with the maids of whom you have spoken, with them I will be distinguished.” 23 Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death. To conclude, Jacob's love for Rachel leads to overemotional enthusiastic actions that suggest his emotions are getting the better of him. Jacob's actions seem to go Against the (1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) warning. David's initial cautiousness seems to be a sign of being wisefully thoughtful, and in turn, seems to align with the (1 Corinthians 7:25-31 ) warning. Sadly, David's marriage to Michal fails. Could someone please try to give their opinions about the aforementioned intertextual scripture-interprets-scripture analysis?
  2. On the significance of the age of the Earth Omegaman Republished from an earlier post on Feb 28, 2009 Is the Earth Old or Young ? No answers here, but some things to think about. I hear this question frequently, but I always wonder what is in the mind of the person asking the question. Is the answer to this question important, and if so, why and in what ways? An unbeliever might like to pit the conclusions of modern scientists, who almost universally hold to the idea that the Earth is very old against the apparent assertions of the Bible that the Earth is relatively young. In other words, if the Bible says the Earth is young, and scientists say the Earth is ancient, then clearly the Bible is wrong and not to be believed. A believer, on the other hand, might look at this problem and conclude, that the unbeliever has a point. Out of concern for the skepticism of the unbeliever, the believer might want to make it easier for the unbeliever to accept the Bible. Similarly, the believer may have his/her own doubts about this and so adopt the position that the correct interpretation of the scriptures is that the Earth is old and in harmony with the consensus of scientists. Personally, I believe the age of the Earth as it relates to an unbeliever is of little significance, and is usually either an excuse not to believe, or is a way of avoiding the important topic of the unbelievers salvation, or moral failures and their implications etc. As a believer addressing this issue with an unbeliever, I will point out that there are believers that hold both positions and that the real topic of concern is whether Jesus came to Earth, died for our sins, and was resurrected on the third day. That is the belief upon which our salvation rests, and any other topic pales in importance. Therefore, I shall be addressing this topic from the stand point of the believer – what it means to us. Is it important what we believe? What should we believe? What concerns me the most, is not what we believe in regards to this question so much as why we believe what we believe. A standard rule of biblical interpretation, is that we interpret the Bible literally, unless we are compelled to do otherwise. Some might make the case that the science is so compelling, that we have to interpret Genesis in some figurative way. I have to ask, what is it, that makes the science so compelling? I am a scientifically minded person, I run much of my daily life depending on ideas which science has observed and proven. Obviously, science has proven to be a powerful and useful tool. However, I think that the most trustworthy part of science, is the part where we can observe current phenomena, develop theories about the phenomena, and test those theories. When we begin to attempt to apply science to metaphysics – the spiritual part of our universe, science has left it’s realm of expertise. When examining topics of an historical nature – the issues of the formation of the universe, the development of life etc, science has also strayed from it’s expertise because it is attempting to guess what has happened in the past, from clues in the present. Most of the time, this will be of questionable reliability, since there is no way to repeat history in a test tube. It is gone, and not subject to examination. For me, what it comes down to then is this: “Which do you trust more, the pronouncements of a demonstrably infallible God, or the pronouncements of demonstrably fallible men?” Now, to be certain, we can make mistakes in our interpretation of the Bible, so both methods have a risk of error. Never-the-less, I believe that the Christian who maintains that the Bible teaches or allows for and ancient earth, is knowingly electing to disbelieve the most natural literal interpretation of the Bible, in favor of the theories of men, derived from the natural sciences. Personally, if I am wrong in my assessment that the Earth might be quite young, I would rather have the clear conscience of taking God at His word and be in error than choosing to trust the dictates of men that God pronounces to be fools for their unbelief of Him. It is true that there are reputable scientists who believe in an old Earth and who profess to be Christians. I do not doubt that most of these men and women are saved, trusting Jesus for their salvation. I do find it very odd, however, that they are willing to trust God about the scientifically unlikely event of the His resurrection, upon which their salvation rests, but cannot find it within themselves, to take Him at His word with regards to issues of origins. In fact, I find it saddening. As you have probably concluded, I am of a younger Earth persuasion. This is not to say that I believe that the Earth was created in 4004 B.C. as some assert. I note that the Bible never makes such a claim, and that this number is merely the result of calculations of a man who added up life spans and genealogies in the Bible. I have never checked his math, but in as much as the Jews were known to practice genealogies with gaps in them, recording more notable ancestors, it seems to me that there is some room for some extra time. In my estimation, all you can prove from the Bible about when the Earth was created, is that Adam, the first man, was created in 4004 B.C. or earlier. How much earlier, I have no idea. In other words, I do not believe the Bible makes any definitive statement on how old the Earth is. Having said that, can I prove there are gaps. Yes and no. The Bible as we know it, notes them itself, by comparing genealogies in some books versus others. In other words, different book describe ancestral lines with differing numbers of people in them. Therefore, some of these have to be incomplete, or else other have extra generations. If there are extras, then those passages are either untrue, or they are some sort of allegory. The do not appear to be allegory, so the most logical choice is that the others are not complete. If they are not complete, then we know that gaps were an allowable custom. Knowing that gaps are allowable, we can assume that all of the genealogies could contain gaps. Now, a little known and underdiscussed fact is, that the Hebrew text from which the 4004 B.C. creation date comes, is the Masoretic text, the major text underlying the translations of many modern Old Testaments. However, copies of the manuscripts of the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew, written some 300 years B.C. with extant copies going back to 400 A.D.) predates the Masoretic text by at least 350 years (the the oldest extant copy of the Masoretic text is Masoretic text dating to the 9th and 10th centuries A.D.) . Jesus and the apostles frequently quoted the Septuagint (or the authors of the gospels quoted the Septuagint when reporting what Jesus said) , so it is safe to assume it was thought reliable as the word of God. The genealogies of the Septuagint, if totaled in the same way that the 4004 B.C. Creation date was arrived at, push the creation date back to 5315 B.C. See how muddy and impossible it is to determine the date from the scripture? To me then, the Bible allows for an undetermined age of the Earth, and mankind is at least 6000 years old (7300 if going by the Septuagint). Which brings us to the length of creation time passed before God created mankind. The Old Earth Theorists, will have to hold to the idea that the 5 days prior to the creation of man, are not 5 literal days, but days which are of undetermined lengths of time, even millions of years each. This is done to force the scriptures to harmonize with scientific conclusions. That people may choose to interpret the Bible according to the dictates of predominantly atheistic scientists, is their own business. I think that it sets a very dangerous precedent, which allows for changing the meaning of the word of God, to suit whatever belief is in fashion. This is already being done in other portions of scripture. For example, science is looking to find a genetic causation for the behavior of homosexuality. If a link can be found to exist between heredity and sexual orientation, then what will follow is a discounting of the biblical notion that the practice homosexuality is a sin. Now, that leap will not be a logical one, but the leap will be made, never-the-less. I could cite other examples, but this one will serve to illustrate the point. However, even if it can be proven that homosexuality is genetically caused, it still does not alter the fact that God calls it a sin to practice, just as He calls it a sin for heterosexuals to act out their carnal desires outside of the man/woman marriage that He ordained. For myself, I shall not ever use the temporary and ever-changing opinions of science (or political correctness) to interpret the God inspired scriptures which never need adjustment, but that is just me. Many Old Earth Creationists are aware of the supremacy of God’s word, but just do not have enough faith in the most natural interpretation of scripture to overcome their faith in modern science. In such cases, I can understand that, but I wish more of them were honest about that fact that that is what the problem is. Sadly, too many choose instead, to find that the traditional beliefs of Christianity are suspect and inferior. It should not take any effort on my part, to convince anyone that the most natural interpretation of the creation days of Genesis, is that they are 6 literal days. Nothing in the text suggests otherwise. Old earth creationists will sometimes go to great lengths to point out that the Hebrew word for day, does not always mean a literal, twenty-four hour day. They are absolutely correct on that point. This Hebrew word is “Yom”. Gen 1:4-5 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning — the first day. (NIV) The first thing to notice about the word “day” as used in the creation account, is that it comes to us pre-defined. The light God called day. We do the same thing to this day. Also, one light and dark cycle, is also called a day. Just like we do. The implications of this one verse are a monumental obstacle, to anyone who wishes to maintain the notion that a day in Genesis, represents a length of time of thousands or millions of years. For one thing, we see here that in context, the word day is used identically as it is normally used in modern English. The internal, literary evidence therefore points to the conclusion that God intended this portion of scripture to be understood as literal, that a day is simply one cycle of light, most likely, near 24 hours long. To assume that something else is intended, is a gross violation of long established rules of interpretation, not only of the Bible, but for any document. Let’s suspend those rules momentarily, and allow for the idea that this day is, for example, not 24 hours, but one million years. Does this help Genesis square with modern scientific opinion? An interesting thing to note in the Genesis account, is that during this first day, the Sun has not yet been caused to shine upon the earth. The lightness and darkness that is cycling, is not sunlight. This gives some wiggle room because this light and dark, may not be dependent upon the rotation of the earth. We could say perhaps, that days were longer at that time. It get’s more difficult to maintain this notion though at creation day 4: Gen 1:16-19 16 God made two great lights — the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning — the fourth day. (NIV) If these days are not 24 hours long, and we go back to the idea that a day is one million years long, might it be that the light was on for 500,000 years during a light/dark cycle. Since the old Earth theory is done to accommodate scientific opinion, then we should be consistent and assess the implication of 500,000 years of light. Is this light of similar intensity to what we experience from the Sun? If so, what would the surface temperature of the Earth rise to? Would the plants (created on the third day) survive the temperatures? Could they survive 500,000 years of darkness and no photosynthesis? I think interpreting the scriptures to accommodate scientific consensus, causes more problems that it solves. I think we have seen that interpreting Genesis passage literally, makes the most sense from a literary perspective. We have seen that interpreting it in the light of science, makes the text into nonsense. What about this word "yom" we touched on briefly, is there a reason to expect that it might mean other than 24 hours in the original Hebrew? My Bible software reports that this word "yom" occurs 2304 times in the Old Testament. That should be plenty of data to work with, to discover the likelihood that yom should be understood as some sort of age. How many times is yom not 24 hours in the Bible? Here are examples of how it is used otherwise: (1)The span of human life. – Gen 5:4: “And the days of Adam …. were eight hundred years.” “And if thou wilt walk …. then I will lengthen thy days” (1 Kings 3:14; compare Ps 90:12; Isa 38:5). (2) An indefinite time. – Existence in general: Gen 3:14: “All the days of thy life” (compare Gen 21:34; Num 9:19; Josh 22:3; Luke 1:24; Acts 21:10). (3) A set time. – Gen 25:24: “And when her days …. were fulfilled”; Dan 12:13: “Thou shalt stand in thy lot, at the end of the days” (compare Lev 12:6; Dan 2:44). (4) A historic period. – Gen 6:4: “The Nephilim were in the earth in those days”; Judg 17:6: “In those days there was no king in Israel” (compare 1 Sam 3:1; 1 Chron 5:17; Hos 2:13). (5) Past time. – Ps 18:18: “the day of my calamity”; Ps 77:5: “I have considered the days of old” (of Mic 7:20; Mal 3:7; Matt 23:30). (6) Future time. – Deut 31:14: “Thy days approach that thou must die”; Ps 72:7: “In his days shall ….” (compare Ezek 22:14; Joel 2:29; Matt 24:19; 2 Peter 3:3; Rev 9:6). (7) The eternal. – In Dan 7:9,13, where God is called “the ancient of days.” (8) A season of opportunity. – John 9:4: “We must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work” (compare Rom 13:12-13; 1 Thess 5:5-8). See DAY (4), above. That was from the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Copyright ©1996 Did you see anything there that seemed to suggest eons of time? Most of those uses are less that a human lifespan. Some, are references to historical periods – in other words AFTER the creation of man. The one possible exception, is number 7 above, but it is a reference to God Himself, not his creation. In short, to say that the word Yom contains the potential to represent millions of years, is forcing a definition or use of it, that is so extreme compared to actual uses of the word, that it can be considered as nothing other than a desperate grasping at straws by those that lack the faith to take God at His word. If any choose to believe the unstable opinions of the sciences over the revelation of God’s word, I am okay with that, I really am. I just wish they would have the honesty to state that they feel the need to abuse the science of hermeneutics to satisfy their own uneasiness about God’s word, instead of trying to convince others that it is somehow justified or legitimate to force personal beliefs upon the interpretation of scripture. To quote Prof. James Barr from the EXPOSITOR’S BIBLE: “If the word ‘day’ in this chapter does not mean the period of 24 hours, the interpretation of Scripture is hopeless.”. Is the evidence too strong against the bible, or at least of a literal interpretation of it? Certainly if scientific consensus is going to be the determining factor concerning out faith and theology, we have to ask the question: What about the resurrection? Scientific consensus would be that a man who dies, and remains dead for three days, stays dead. If God cannot defy the opinions of scientists, then no miracles happen, not now, not ever, and the resurrection never took place. If that is true, then Christianity is little more than a collection of interesting tales, sort of like Aesop's Fables. If God is going to be limited to our understanding of the laws of nature, then why would we be wondering about the length of the creation period. A God without the power to do the miraculous, could not bring the creation into existence in the first place. If that creation did not happen, then why would we suspect that creation has an author at all, and without such and author, does sin really exist? Who gets to define what is sin and what is not, who decides how salvation is accomplished or if it is even necessary. Is there really even an afterlife? Apart from a revelation from a supernatural God, these things are all unknowable, and Christianity has no real value. It may not be critically important, how long creation took, but knowing that it took place, believing God by faith that it did, is important, and I have to wonder how much we really believe God, if we cannot trust Him to accurately describe and make plain, the details of His own creation. Consider some of the implications of a lengthy creation. How does it affect other beliefs or statements from the Bible? Do other passages make reference to the creation events – do we call them into question? Did Jesus or the apostles mention anything about the creation account that would leave you to believe that they took it literally – if so, how does that affect their credibility? If we can choose to ignore a literal interpretation in Genesis – do we then grant ourselves the same license in other parts of the Bible – if so, how will you know where and when? These are questions each person must address and consider. While science has century by century, worked to discover how the universe works, each generation of scientists has seen major scientific opinions come and go. Each generation of scientists indeed, has at it’s disposal, new knowledge and new tools to investigate the natural world. Each generation has advanced the collective knowledge of mankind, and each has refuted theories held dearly by colleagues of previous generations, and yet, after thousands of years, is still seeking answers to fundamental questions, answers that are elusive. Meanwhile, the Christian is able to hold the same views as Jesus and the apostles expressed 2000 years ago, with no need to apologize for any of them. The 20th Century saw the sciences advance at a tremendous rate, but as theories about origins and cosmology became more refined and old ones discarded as obsolete, we found that the theories of prevailing science, are looking more like the bible all the time. Of course, science cannot truly address origins and cosmology ultimately, because those things are outside of it’s scope of examination. Science works in the present, it examines present clues about past events. The past is not like electricity or chemistry, it cannot be replicated or examined directly. Modern science is even more at a disadvantage, to look into matters of a spiritual nature. Science examines natural phenomena, the supernatural is outside it’s purview. Still, it is interesting to observe that scientists seem to be edging their way toward beliefs that the bible expressed all along. Considering that the bible is not intended to be a science text book, it is remarkable how many scientific facts it got right before scientists would discover them. Addendum, added on 11/14/2014 Some years ago I developed a calculator which computes theoretical future population numbers from assumed starting calculation numbers and factors like length of generations, birth rates etc. It cannot adequately factor in unknown and unpredictable events like plagues, wars, etc. due to complexity and my own ignorance on those subjects. I also know that there is some error in the math, that skews the results by a generation or two, and I have not been able to figure out where the error lies, and have given up trying, I have more important things to do. However, if you would like to speculate and experiment with the calculator, using your own chosen assumptions, I have decided to publish the calculator as it is. While it is imperfect, I beleive it does demonstrate that the young earth model is more feasible that the ancient earth model, based on math and what we know about population growth and statistics, if the interests you at all, have fun by: clicking here. (http://omegazine.com/population/populationpredictions/populationpredictions.htm) Edit: As I write this on July 5th, 2021, the above link is not functional, but there is an archive of that page at: http://web.archive.org/web/20150227203333/http://omegazine.com/population/populationpredictions/populationpredictions.htm Below were 10 Responses to the original posting of “On the significance of the age of the Earth”: shawn Says: March 9th, 2009 at 11:16 am This is such an unfortunate topic for Christians. I am a believer in Yeshua. I also believe that Rome High jacked Christianity and changed it into what ever they wanted. Not only did they change the Shabbat to the day they worshiped the sun, as well as a great many other holy days, but they also changed the relationship between the Torah and science. In Judaism the Torah and modern science go hand in hand. Many of the great Jewish sages hundreds of years ago calculated the age of the universe to be 13 billion years old and they did this using the same bible that christians use to say the earth is only 6000 years old. Because Rome high jacked christianity and changed a great many of things we have not only lost great spiritual gifts but we have also lost a most basic understanding of our natural universe that the rabbi’s have until this very day. If you want to rectify the bible and science you dont need to try and debunk science, science is from Hashem. Science is good, it is our roman inheritance of the hatred of science that is bad. Rome hated science because they hated any opposition to their views on how to interepret the bible. But if we take back what rome stole from us, our Israelite heratige as christians, then we will finally be able to rectify not only science but also a great many spiritual gifts and understandings that were stolen from us. Blessing to you and your community in the name of Yeshua HaMashiach our Rabbi. josiah Says: April 6th, 2009 at 7:35 am hi..My name is Jos , from new zealand and im 38 years of age, currently studying at otago unversity in new zealand. I disagree with some of your statements, and would like to offer a rebuttal.I dont think this is a unfortunate topic, nor do i agree with your quote that it is irrelevant..I quote from your text “Personally, I believe the age of the Earth as it relates to an unbeliever is of little significance, and is usually either an excuse not to believe, or is a way of avoiding the important topic of the unbelievers salvation. As a believer addressing this issue with an unbeliever, I will point out that there are believers that hold both positions and that the real topic of concern is whether Jesus came to Earth, died for our sins, and was resurrected on the third day. That is the belief upon which our salvation rests, and any other topic pales in importance” If you look into the historical context, to the unbeliver, the church has always suppresed the formation of scientific ideas formed from observation and interpretation of the results.This is why we had “dark ages” and why they are called “dark ages”. Christians are all too happy to accept the material benifits of technological and scientific endevour, such as internet, computers, carpets and the lightbulb but when it comes to facing up to the questions asked by the scientific community, most immediatly go into ostritch mode and pretend they dont exist until the thing goes away. but the thing doesnt go away, and now all the things that havent gone away are taught as scientific fact to your children.I dont have any children, so that why i say your children. I am a christian – that is i belive and try to adhere to the teachings of Jesus of nazereth and his disiples.I belive Jesus of nazereth is the son of God. I belive he died on our behalf for my sins and wrongdoings against God, and by accepting his sacrifice on my behalf i will have eternal life with him in The presence of God the Father and The holy spirit and all the Angels and others who have believed as i do. I also belive that the law and the prophets, the old testament was inspired by God and in some books directly transmitted by God Orally to Moses, such as the book of Genesis. I belive that the interpretation of the words of Genesis is literal, that is creation took 6 literal 24 hour periods.I am also a scientist. I am currently returned to university to undertake a B.A. in Lingustics, with a minor in Geology. I like volcanoes. i know that the current interpretation of the Geological record is in error. The majority of the Geologic community dissagree with me. some might even go so far as to say that i am misguided, or quite simply a religous nutter.you can imagine that someone with views like mine goes down in academic circles like a lead balloon at a party.lol. But there are flaws in the theory of geologic time, that can be found. The truth points to itself. Its time for us to admit we don’t know all the answers, nor should we pretend too.This is the crux of what scientific method or reasoning is about -to quote websters dictionary… “principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses..” but i do belive we should tackle these problems with Faith in the Lord Jesus christ as our guide, pray for guidance, and look for credible scientific evidence to support the creation story and present this to everyone freely for discussion and debate because surely as eggs are eggs if we dont try to answer the hard questions, and tackle the problems presented by the current view of the community at large for a old earth and no God, why should people resonably listen to us when we try to share our beliefs? And as you can see currently in the textbooks of any mainstream high school, the Devil is not lax. What makes us different from the ten-thousand other wacko’s with thier own take on The metaphysical universe? I personally dont belive, although i may be wrong, that Paul the apostle, who was a learned man would agree with your arguement, but putting it in context, he said” i count it all as loss for the gospel,” yet he reasoned with men, trying to win them over to the gospel by showing them thier errors in logical thinking as well as christian works of good deeds, and living at peace with all men as far as possible. I hope you take my argument to heart and consider it. afterwards, you may still belive that i am wrong.I would like to hear your thoughts. jos..11.35, 6th april 2009. Omegaman 2.0 Responds: April 10th, 2009 at 12:31 am Hi Jos, I don’t think I have anything to disagree with there, and yet my mind has not changed. How is this possible? I am an apologist, I believe in being ready always to give and answer for the hope that I have. Does my hope lie in the age of the earth, or in questions like “how could all the animals fit on the ark”? My hope lies in a risen savior. That is what I am supposed to defend. I am a young earther personally, but I find that giving answers to defend that view to be a poor investment in time. I have those answers, and answers for the animals on the ark etc. How about the existence of God? Yes, I can defend those too. I have spent hours at a time doing so many times, and in my experience, all I end up doing is convincing people that I am more knowledgeable than they first believed, and that I actually have some good points. Good for my ego, but not worthwhile. That is all well and good, if my task is to win debates, but I think it more important, to win souls. So, I may have not been clear on my comments, by not being thorough enough in my explanation. My point is, that Christians can go round and round debating the age of the earth themselves, the topic is not relevant to unbelievers from our point of view if it does not move them closer to a decision. I think that these kind of doubts, shared by believers and unbelievers alike, distract us from the real issues. If a person is curious about how I can hold a young earth view, I will make my response in as brief and yet convincing way that I can, but I am going to change the topic to the gospel as quickly as I can – the heart of what I am called to defend. What I find is, that as soon as I defend the early age of the earth, the subject will then go: “what about the animals”, I answer and the subject then goes “what about all the contradictions in the Bible”, and so on and so on and so on. Games of "what about" and "what if", are the ploys of one who seeks to win a debate, not one who wants to ponder the issues. Paul described a type of person that would exist in the last days: ” They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. – 2 Tim 3:6-7 NIV I do not want to enable anyone to remain in that category – merely always learning. I want to attempt to get them to acknowledge the truth. In as much as Jesus instructed the disciples: “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.” - Matt 10:14 I take it He meant that we need to be wise, not wasting time casting our pearls before swine, but instead, moving on to greener pastures, where the sheep know they need a shepherd. Lest you still miss my point, I was not trying to say that the age of the earth is of no relevance, and certainly your point about Christians needing to have credibility is a valid one. However, most of the people that the normal Christian encounters, are not scientists, are not familiar with the research nor the scientific method. For the average Christian to try to convince the average unbeliever on the topics in early Genesis, is very difficult. After all, if that person is swayed by science, he will most likely automatically ignore the opinion of a Christian, who is not a scientist normally, and favor the opinion of an actual expert. If he is not swayed by science, then you are wasting your time anyway, as he will not listen to either one of you. Remember, even Christians disagree on the topic, so, I would rather move on to the topic all Christians agree on, the person of Jesus Christ, the center of our faith and hope. To quote you: “I like volcanoes. i know that the current interpretation of the Geological record is in error. The majority of the Geologic community disagree with me. some might even go so far as to say that i am misguided, or quite simply a religious nutter.you can imagine that someone with views like mine goes down in academic circles like a lead balloon at a party.” I believe you, and I believe the the unbelieving world get that. If you cannot convince your colleagues, I am not sure how successful you will be with those who are more willing to believe them that you. Now in the context of academic circles, I believe these topics are critically important. I am just referring to the day to day encounters of believers, who spend time in debates that cannot be won, because in those debates, it is not the truth that matters to some, the only thing that matters to them is to win, or, in some cases to not lose, and therefore remain comfortable in their unbelief. In as much as there are Christians who believe that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, who came and died for our sins, that we might be forgiven and have eternal life, who also believe that the Bible is the inerrant and inspired word of God and who also believe in an ancient earth and a lengthy creation process, I have little desire, nor do I see much benefit, to devoting too much time to topics that do little to advance the case of Christ. The topic is not related to salvation, and that is why I give it little significance. That is all I meant by that paragraph that you so eloquently and respectfully rebutted. Thank you for taking the time to read my ‘article’ and investing the time to correct me. Omegaman Omegaman 2.0 Responds: April 11th, 2009 at 3:12 am Quoteing Shawn: “In Judaism the Torah and modern science go hand in hand. Many of the great Jewish sages hundreds of years ago calculated the age of the universe to be 13 billion years old and they did this using the same bible that christians use to say the earth is only 6000 years old. ” Do you have any sources for this Shawn, that would be interesting to see. I also cannot fathom that anyone could “calculate” 13 billion years using anything in the Bible. If it was Rome that hijaaked the faith and came up with the 6000 year old calculation, why does the Jewish calendar indicate that it as been 5769 years since the creation? FresnoJoe Says: May 31st, 2009 at 4:05 am The Reason I Must Discount The Speculations Of Various White Coats And Such Is The Record Of Book Of Beginnings And All The References (OT/NT) To My LORD’s Part As Creator And The Accounting Of The Short Lineage Of The Brothers/Sisters From Jesus All The Way Back To The Sixth Day Of Creation “And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,” “Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,” “Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,” “Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,” “Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,” “Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,” “Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,” “Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,” “Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,” “Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,” “Which was th”e son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,” “Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,” “Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,” “Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,” “Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,” “Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.” Luke 3:23-38 If One Believes In The Resurrection (After Three Days!) Of The Uncorrupted Physical Body Of Our LORD And Our Savior And The Redemption Of Vile Hateful Sinner Man By The Holy And Pure Blood Of The Lamb Of God Then The Creation Of Life, The Universe And Everything Is Just The Finger Play Of God And Will Be Nothing Compared To The Knowledge Of The Heights Of The Love And The Amazing Grace God Offers To The Sons Of Adam To Folks Such As You And I Love, Joe andrew o'shea Says June 19th, 2009 at 7:04 am: oh the mysteries of God. all will be revealed at the gathering of the saints, children of God who believe in the Son Jesus Christ, Yeshua. people by nature like to argue, that has always been man’s problem and why we have to have wars. It is by faith we believe God, a gift He gave us. I had my experience and have never looked back, i believe God. The only thing that matters to me is that i can relate to people the love God has for them that may recieve remission of sins and eternal life, John 14 v 26 the Holy Spirit will teach us all things and bring to our rememberance all the things we have been taught.’ it really doesn’t matter to me how old the earth is rather how much time is left. a great deception of the enemy is to get us to focus on things any thing that distracts from the salvation message, eternal life. we can ask and be told how old the earth is,i did, God bless you all on your journeys, no i wont ‘measure the earth’ i wouldn’t know where to begin. searching scripture i came to approx. 6000 years, think about God’s time line, 7 is a sabbath,mmmm getting close to Jesus return. come Lord come hallelujah, repent and be save God loves us amen Linda Says July 3rd, 2009 at 10:40 pm: Here’s a way to think about the “How old is the earth” question. When God created Adam he created a man. Not baby. Not a child. Simply put…. who is to say that God did not create the earth as an “adult earth”. Why do we think it had to be created in an infant stage? Lean not to our own understanding. Omegaman 2.0 Responds: July 15th, 2009 at 11:16 pm Hi Linda. I believe you are relating an argument often put forth by those who hold to an old earth theory, in answer to those who hold to the idea of an more recent creation on the basis that the universe and the earth appears old, much older than 6000 ears. The young earthers sometimes respond to the that the earth has an appearance of age, because God created it that way, mature as you put it. There answer to that would be that the earth does not just appear mature, it appears worn out. By analogy with adam, it would be like God created Adam with teeth that were worn down, were stained yellow, had cavities and perhaps few missing as well. By this analogy, Eve would be looking in the mirror at her gray hair and wrinkles on her first day, if she had been created with the appearance of age, instead of mere maturity. Many scientists and those who follow their lead, believe the earth worn, not merely mature. While my point was that the whole issue should not given more importance than it merits. That being said, I will give the response that the Old Earthers would give. They would also point out, that if God created the world to look that old, when it was in fact only a few thousand years old, then that would make God a deceiver, as though He was trying to fool people into believing the young earth was ancient, when that is not the case. Personally, I find that to be one of the most powerful arguments from the Old Earth camp. Of course, like most things there are difficulties. While an old earther can state that creating an earth to look old, makes God a deceiver if it is in fact young, does not the old earther have the same dilemma, if the earth is actually old, yet God chose to say it is young in His word? I prefer to accept that the earth is young, doing my best to understand scripture, and maintain that God is not a deceiver, but that some scientists are in error in how they interpret data, and in some cases, maybe they are the deceivers. I could go into details of what I think might be solutions to why the young earth appears old, but that is not the purpose of the post. I am not putting forth an apologetic for a young earth, I am making the point that faith in what God has said, trumps evidence from modern science for believers who think like I do. Sohei Says: August 21st, 2009 at 3:48 am Wasn’t Jesus a Jewish rabbi? Then he was taught same as others, which he didn’t dispute. They say Earth is 5769 years old. I would guess you would have to argue with what Jesus was taught. Sohei, do you have any source material demonstrating that the belief among Jewish rabbis 2000 years ago, was in a young earth of the age you suggest? I don't think Jesus was a rabbi in the way we usually think of the term, I certainly don't see in scripture any indication of formal teaching, but I do suspect, that He would have understood from the scripture, that the earth was fairly recent, and of course being the Creator, He actually knew for certain at some level. winsomebulldog Says March 26th, 2010 at 9:53 am: I’m not positive about how old this post is, but I just wanted to leave a quick comment none-the-less. I have read through several of your posts and find it comforting to encounter another “scientifically minded” Christian. Sometimes, those two things instigate internal battles, and some might even argue that the very notion is an oxymoron. My husband and I cannot, however, change who and what we are. We are intelligent people who respect and appreciate the sciences. We are also Christians. Our faith does, and in truth must, outweigh our intelligence. Our God gave us both the ability to learn and a hunger for learning. Hubby is an engineer and at one time was in the aeronautical engineering program at Perdu University with an eye toward NASA. He has a grasp of physics and math that I cannot even fathom at times. But even he knows that science is nothing more than an effort by finite, fallible humans to define and quantify the unfathomable. Personally, I am willing to admit that there have been times in my life that I found myself struggling to reconcile what my mind wanted to believe and what my faith demanded that I accept. It is very easy, I think, for a scientifically minded Christian to be seduced by all the scientific “evidence.” It can sound so convincing. And Lord knows that scientists these days are very fond of spouting off their theories as if they are in fact scientific laws. (One look at the pervasive THEORY of evolution is evidence of that.) Hubby and I are fond of scientific programming on television and have watched more than a few that dealt with everything from dinosaurs to the big bang theory. How anyone with a critical mind could not see the evidence of the countless suppositions that are made here is beyond us both. We have both concluded that it would be vastly easier to be Christians without a bent toward scientific, critical thinking. But God did not create us that way and so we must both strive to never let our brains override our faith. I have rambled on far longer than I intended. But I really wanted to let you know how much I have appreciated your posts. Thank you for speaking your mind without fear. And thank God for forums like this that allow Christians everywhere to connect and share. God Bless You.
  3. Sept. 18th, 2008 - - - Post Script - There is also a version of this post at the blog on my website which has links to online copies of the books mentioned In as much as several of you lately, and many over the years have asked how I go about Bible Study and why I think my approach is a good one, I have decided to blog on that topic. First off, I do three different types of Bible studies. Expository, topical, and word studies. As I define the terms, an expository study is one were I select a passage, a chapter, a whole book, or some other contiguous grouping of words from the Bible, and then go verse by verse, looking at the verse, it’s context, the intended audience, the historical setting and any parallel or related passages, to gain an understanding of the grouping of words which I am examining. I would say that a topical study, would be an examination of a specific subject, such as abortion, the rapture, tithing, marriage, etc. Finally, a word study is where I begin by looking at a word in a verse or verses in English, where either i am uncertain of it’s usage, or just want to more fully understand it’s significance and nuances, Then look ate the original Greek or Hebrew word that was translated into the specific English word at the location in question. Once having identified the original language word, I then look at every occurrence of that word in the Greek or Hebrew to see the ways the word is used, and also consult works written for the purpose of original language study, such as Lexicons. My favorite type is the topical study, but the methods I use are based on principles that can be applied not only in these different studies, but can be applied to other historical literature as well as current literature. There are rules of interpretation than most conservative theologians agree upon. By and large, they look to me to be good common sense rules, so I try to stick to them. This minimizes the “that’s your interpretation” phenomenon, which is so silly. I prefer to have a good interpretation any day, than MY interpretation. Many of these rules come from traditional Jewish rules of interpretation. Now immediately, we must concede, that there are obviously limitations to these rules, or most Jews would have recognized their Messiah. The problem is, that we are human, we make mistakes, and we bring our own prejudices and preconceptions to the interpretive table. It is true for me, it is true for you also. So, sound rules are a foundation for understanding the Bible in a consistent manner, they are there to help you see past your own prejudices, but they will only work if you are willing to be consistent, and not change the rules to suit an interpretation you prefer. So what are some of these rules? In no particular order: Always examine a verse or passage in it’s context. This means that you look at the verses leading up to that passage, and following, so that you can see what the cubject actually is, being discussed. Ignore the chapter heading and number, these are man-made, it is up to you to determine when a subject begins and ends. Examining a passage in context, also involves not just reading and understanding the nearby verses, but also identify who is being addressed in a passage, for whom is the message intended. Sometimes it is a specific individual, some times Israel, sometimes the church, sometimes it applies universally to mankind, determine this. The historical context is also important, Understanding things about a time and place, can affect how you understand the passage. Context, is one of the most important aspects of Biblical interpretation. Okay, suppose we have done all that. We have arrived at what we think the verse is saying and to whom. Remember that the scriptures are divinely inspired. Therefore, they will never contradict each other. We can use that to help us check our understanding of a verse or passage in question. The next rule is: Compare Scripture with Scripture Here, we search out other passages on the same topic. For example, let’s say we examined the ten commandments, and saw there: “Thou shalt not kill.” We have now the understanding that it is always wrong to kill. However, as we read in other places in the Bible, we find that God ordains wars, and prescribes putting people to death for certain crimes. Knowing that the God does not contradict himself, we understand that we must have a faulty understanding of “thou shalt not kill”. This brings us to another rule of interpretation. Examine the Verse in the Original Language Time was when you had to own quite a library to follow all of these rules effectively. In modern times, there are theological libraries in the form of software, which are substantially less expensive than they would be in printed form. Additionally, many of these helps are online. Go and experiment with sites such as blueletterbible.org, biblestudytools.com, and/or biblehub.com. You will find many things to aid your understanding on those sites. In the case of thou shalt not kill, we would find that a better translation of the Hebrew would have been “You shall do no murder”. Another tool which is indispensable is a concordance. A concordance let’s you look up Bible verses by words that exist in English in the verse. For example, if you looked up the word “locusts”, you would discover the word occurs in 17 verses. The concordance would show you part of the verse - a partial context. This is useful if you want to find verses that have a word in common with a verse you are examining. Seeing the context, lets you see if the verse is related to the topic you are studying, or to the verse you are studying, In the Gospels for instance, the different authors some times have additional details that another Gospel writer left out. Perhaps you are wanting to find a particular verse you are thinking of, a concordance can be useful for that. This can also be done with online Bible search sites. The next ones are not rules, but recommendations. Read a passage in several translations. Translations are not all alike, nor equally good, and none is without error. Most are pretty good for casual reading of the scriptures, but by reading a passage in a different version, you can often uncover some nuance, that you may want to explore further. Additionally, it is a good idea to to read about a given passage in a commentary or two, or three. In that way, you reap the benefit of the work that someone has already put into understanding the passage you are looking at. Here again, none is without error. In fact, by reading commentaries, you may come across views you never considered. Consider them, but stick with the Bible text itself, which brings me to the next rule. Let Scripture Interpret Scripture What do we mean by that? Sometimes a verse you may be considering, is already discussed in another passage in the Bible. Since the Bible is inspired by God, you have to accept the Bible’s explanation of itself. How would you know that a passage is commented on in another section in the Bible? My primary answer is read the Bible until you are familiar with it. I realize than not everyone will follow this advice, so there are other ways. The commentaries I spoke of, will often point such passages out. A good reference Bible, such as Thompson’s Chain Reference Bible, will show related passages - a very helpful tool. Edit March 1st, 2020: Because of their expansive and excellent notes, I also recommend the NIV Zondervan Study Bible (I am not the biggest fan of the NIV, but the notes more than make up for it. There is an undated version which I have not seen, so cannot comment, but it is NIV, Biblical Theology Study Bible. Also excellent, is the ESV Study Bible. If I had to have just one Bible, that would be it! End of Edit When reading a passage, assume it is literal, unless there is a compelling reason not to. In John 10:9 (NASB) Jesus says: “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.” A literal translation of that would be to think of Jesus claiming to be a slab of wood on a hinge. There is no need to be so literal. The context of the passage will usually indicate what the author was saying. Parables and visions, similes and metaphors are frequently used in the bible. There is an excellent book on parable and metaphors (The Parables and Metaphors of Our Lord), Learn to recognize these things. Some times it may not be so obvious: John 11:11-15 after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I go, that I may awaken him out of sleep.” 12 The disciples therefore said to Him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” 13 Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that He was speaking of literal sleep. 14 Then Jesus therefore said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead, (NASB) In the passage above, we see that even the disciples took things too literally. Understand the Historical Background This takes some digging, but it is most helpful to understand figures of speech, customs and historical circumstances surrounding a passage. Where is the author, why is he there? To whom is he writing and why? These type of things are very useful to stay aware of. For example, some passages are written directly to a person of a people, and may not apply universally. Strive to avoid interpreting through the eyes of your own experience and culture. A helpful tool for this is the book: "The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah" Keep with precedents Some people love inventing new meanings for words. Understand what the words meant when they were written from the original languages, if you are working in your own language, understand the meaning of the word when they were translated. For example, you may run across the word “quick” in the King James Version. Quick meant ‘living’ or ‘alive’ in 1611, not ‘fast’. Many modern commentators have erred by insisting that certain words mean certain things that they did not mean when written, don’t make the same mistake and don’t make the mistake of assuming that what they say is true, do your own research. Use Common Logic This one seems like a no-brainer that I should not even have to mention. Ask yourself, if a given understanding of a passage makes sense. Be careful here though, not everyone thinks alike. When I say to ask if it makes sense, I don’t mean does it make sense to you! I mean is the conclusion a rational one given the words used, the circumstances etc. is it where the majority of scriptural evidence points you? Don’t make the mistake of using you logic to over-rule the plain revelation of scripture. For example, I don’t like hell. It makes no sense to me that such a place would exist, why punish someone eternally for things done during the short span of a lifetime. However, I must keep in mind, that my thoughts are not His thoughts, and my ways are not His ways, so, I go with what scripture plainly teaches - there is a Hell. Recognize and determine the validity of inference This is similar to the above. You may find it difficult, for example, to discover a verse that indicates God is a triune being. However, you might fine a verse that refers to a person known as the Holy Spirit, and that the person is called God. You might find a reference to the fact that there is a person called the Father, who is also called God. Then you may find a reference to a person who is called the Son, again, He is called God also. You will find verses that indicate the these person are distinct. You will also find versed that categorically state that there is only one God. Putting them all together, we realize that there are three separate persons who are each God, and there is only one God. Therefore, the three persons are the one God. That is inference. For some, this makes no sense, I have no problem with it. This is a case however, where you may have to suspend what you think is logic, and accept that this is what is revealed in scripture, we have no right to over-ride revelation with our opinions. The flip side is, do not make inferances, were they are not truly justified, that will lead you astray. Recognize the unity of scripture The 66 books that make up the Bible each has it’s own story to tell. However, there is one author behind each of them, and He has His story to tell as well. When you read and study the Bible, be aware that there are themes that thread their way through the various books of the Bible, some books cannot be fully understood without the benefit of the other books. If you have an interpretation of a passage, that is a contradiction to another passage, then you have not reached a correct understanding, for God does not contradict Himself. There may be more that I am forgetting, I will add them in if they occur to me, but that is the way that I approach the study of the scriptures, I hope some of these principles, are ones that you will find helpful in your own studies. Be Blessed! Ω Omegaman 2.0
  4. How I Study the Bible - One Approach I am not an expert, I am just a lay person like most of you, with not formal Bible training of education. Such education can be very helpful, or very hurtful, because we are all in the same boat. We are human, we make mistakes, we misunderstand. This is true of seminary professors, authors, pastors, and you and I. If you do not think you are in that category, then you are either Jesus, or you think of yourself more highly than you ought to. That being said, and hopefully understood and accpeted, I would like to share with you how I approach Bible study, in an effort to minimize my misunderstandings, and maximize what I learn from scripture. First off, I do three different types of Bible studies. Expository, topical, and word studies. As I define the terms, an expository study is one were I select a passage, a chapter, a whole book, or some other contiguous grouping of words from the Bible, and then go verse by verse, looking at the verse, it’s context, the intended audience, the historical setting and any parallel or related passages, to gain an understanding of the grouping of words which I am examining. I would say that a topical study, would be an examination of a specific subject, such as abortion, the rapture, tithing, marriage, etc. Finally, a word study is where I begin by looking at a word in a verse or verses in English, where either I am uncertain of it’s usage, or just want to more fully understand it’s significance and nuances. Then look at the original Greek or Hebrew word that was translated into the specific English word at the location in question. Once having identified the original language word, I then look at every occurrence of that word in the Greek or Hebrew to see the ways the word is used, and also consult works written for the purpose of original language study, such as Lexicons. My favorite type is the topical study, but the methods I use are based on principles that can be applied not only in these different studies, but can be applied to other historical literature as well as current literature. There are rules of interpretation than most conservative theologians agree upon. By and large, they look to me to be good common sense rules, so I try to stick to them. This minimizes the “that’s your interpretation” phenomenon, which is so silly. I prefer to have a good interpretation any day, than MY interpretation. Many of these rules come from traditional Jewish rules of interpretation. Now immediately, we must concede, that there are obviously limitations to these rules, or most Jews would have recognized their Messiah. The problem is, that we are human, we make mistakes, and we bring our own prejudices and preconceptions to the interpretive table. It is true for me, it is true for you also. So, sound rules are a foundation for understanding the Bible in a consistent manner, they are there to help you see past your own prejudices, but they will only work if you are willing to be consistent, and not change the rules to suit an interpretation you prefer. So what are some of these rules? In no particular order. Always examine a verse or passage in it’s context This means that you look at the verses leading up to that passage, and following, so that you can see what the subject actually is which is being discussed. Ignore the chapter heading and number, these are man-made, it is up to you to determine when a subject begins and ends. Examining a passage in context, also involves not just reading and understanding the nearby verses, but also identify who is being addressed in a passage. For whom is the message intended? Sometimes it is a specific individual, some times Israel, sometimes the church, sometimes it applies universally to mankind, determine this. The historical context is also important, Understanding things about a time and place, can affect how you understand the passage. Context, is one of the most important aspects of Biblical interpretation. Okay, suppose we have done all that. We have arrived at what we think the verse is saying and to whom. Remember that the scriptures are divinely inspired. Therefore, they will never contradict each other. We can use that to help us check our understanding of a verse or passage in question. The next rule is: Compare Scripture with Scripture Here, we search out other passages on the same topic. For example, let’s say we examined the ten commandments, and saw there: “Thou shalt not kill.” We have now the understanding that it is always wrong to kill. However, as we read in other places in the Bible, we find that God ordains wars, and prescribes putting people to death for certain crimes. Knowing that the God does not contradict himself, we understand that we must have a faulty understanding of “thou shalt not kill”. This brings us to another rule of interpretation. Examine the Verse in the Original Language Time was when you had to own quite a library to follow all of these rules effectively. In modern times, there are theological libraries in the form of software, which are substantially less expensive than they would be in printed form. Additionally, many of these helps are online. Go and experiment with sites such as blueletterbible.org, biblestudytools.com, biblehub.com, etc. You will find many things to aid your understanding on those sites. In the case of thou shalt not kill, we would find that a better translation of the Hebrew would have been “You shall do no murder”. Another tool which is indispensable is a concordance. A concordance let’s you look up Bible verses by words that exist in English in the verse. For example, if you looked up the word “locusts”, you would discover the word occurs in 17 verses. The concordance would show you part of the verse - a partial context. This is useful if you want to find verses that have a word in common with a verse you are examining. Seeing the context, lets you see if the verse is related to the topic you are studying, or to the verse you are studying, In the Gospels for instance, the different authors some times have additional details that another Gospel writer left out. Perhaps you are wanting to find a particular verse you are thinking of, a concordance can be useful for that. This can also be done with online Bible search sites. The next ones are not rules, but recommendations. Read a passage in several translations. Translations are not all alike, nor equally good, and none is without error. Most are pretty good for casual reading of the scriptures, but by reading a passage in a different version, you can often uncover some nuance, that you may want to explore further. Additionally, it is a good idea to to read about a given passage in a commentary or two, or three. In that way, you reap the benefit of the work that someone has already put into understanding the passage you are looking at. Here again, none is without error. In fact, by reading commentaries, you may come across views you never considered. Consider them thoughtfully, but realize that only the Bible text itself, is inspired. This brings me to the next rule. Let Scripture Interpret Scripture What do we mean by that? Sometimes a verse you may be considering, is already discussed in another passage in the Bible. Since the Bible is inspired by God, you have to accept the Bible’s explanation of itself. How would you know that a passage is commented on in another section in the Bible? My primary answer is read the Bible until you are familiar with it. I realize than not everyone will follow this advice, so there are other ways. The commentaries I spoke of, will often point such passages out. A good reference Bible, such as Thompson’s Chain Referance Bible, will show related passages - a very helpful tool. When reading a passage, assume it is literal, unless there is a compelling reason not to. In John 10:9 (NASB) Jesus says: “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.” A literal translation of that would be to think of Jesus claiming to be a slab of wood on a hinge. There is no need to be so literal. The context of the passage will usually indicate what the author was saying. Parables and visions, similes and metaphors are frequently used in the Bible. There is an excellent book on parables and metaphors (by G. Campbell Morgan). Learn to spot this type or writing, sometimes it is not so obvious: John 11:11-15 after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I go, that I may awaken him out of sleep.” 12 The disciples therefore said to Him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” 13 Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that He was speaking of literal sleep. 14 Then Jesus therefore said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead", (NASB) In the passage above, we see that even the disciples took things too literally. Understand the Historical Background This takes some digging, but it is most helpful to understand figures of speech, customs and historical circumstances surrounding a passage. Where is the author, why is he there? To whom is he writing and why? These type of things are very useful to stay aware of. For example, some passages are written directly to a person of a people, and may not apply universally. Strive to avoid interpreting through the eyes of your own experience and culture. A helpful tool for this is the book: "The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah" (Alfred Edersheim). Keep with precedents Some people love inventing new meanings for words. Understand what the words meant when they were written from the original languages, if you are working in your own language, understand the meaning of the word when they were translated. For example, you may run across the word “quick” in the King James Version. Quick meant ‘living’ or ‘alive’ in 1611, not ‘fast’ or 'sudden'. Many modern commentators have erred by insisting that certain words mean certain things that they did not mean when written, don’t make the same mistake and don’t make the mistake of assuming that what they say is true, do your own research. Use Common Logic This one seems like a no-brainer that I should not even have to mention. Ask yourself, if a given understanding of a passage makes sense. Be careful here though, not everyone thinks alike. When I say to ask if it makes sense, I don’t mean does it make sense to you! I mean is the conclusion a rational one given the words used, the circumstances etc. is it where the majority of scriptural evidence points you? Don’t make the mistake of using your logic to over-rule the plain revelation of scripture. For example, I don’t like hell. It makes no sense to me that such a place would exist, why punish someone eternally for things done during the short span of a lifetime. However, I must keep in mind, that my thoughts are not His thoughts, and my ways are not His ways, so, I go with what scripture plainly teaches - there is a Hell. Recognize and determine the validity (or lack thereof) of inference This is similar to the above. You may find it difficult, for example, to discover a verse that indicates God is a triune being. However, you might fine a verse that refers to a person known as the Holy Spirit, and that the person is called God. You might find a reference to the fact that there is a person called the Father, who is also called God. Then you may find a reference to a person who is called the Son, again, He is called God also. You will find verses that indicate the these person are distinct. You will also find versed that categorically state that there is only one God. Putting them all together, we realize that there are three separate persons who are each God, and there is only one God. Therefore, the three persons are the one God. That is inference. For some, this makes no sense, I have no problem with it. This is a case however, where you may have to suspend what you think is logical, and accept instead, that this is what is revealed in scripture, we have no right to over-ride revelation with our opinions. Recognize the unity of scripture The 66 books that make up the Bible each has it’s own story to tell. However, there is one author behind each of them, and He has His story to tell as well. When you read and study the Bible, be aware that there are themes that thread their way through the various books of the Bible, some books cannot be fully understood without the benefit of the other books. If you have an interpretation of a passage, that is a contradiction to another passage, then you have not reached a correct understanding, for God does not contradict Himself. There may be more that I am forgetting, I will add them in if they occur to me, but that is the way that I approach the study of the scriptures, I hope some of these principles, are ones that you will find helpful in your own studies. Be Blessed!
  5. Originally published September 28th, 2008 In as much as several of you lately, and many over the years have asked how I go about Bible Study and why I think my approach is a good one, I have decided to blog on that topic.First off, I do three different types of Bible studies. Expository, topical, and word studies.As I define the terms, an expository study is one were I select a passage, a chapter, a whole book, or some other contiguous grouping of words from the Bible, and then go verse by verse, looking at the verse, it’s context, the intended audience, the historical setting and any parallel or related passages, to gain an understanding of the grouping of words which I am examining.I would say that a topical study, would be an examination of a specific subject, such as abortion, the rapture, tithing, marriage, etc.Finally, a word study is where I begin by looking at a word in a verse or verses in English, where either I am uncertain of it’s usage, or just want to more fully understand it’s significance and nuances, Then look ate the original Greek or Hebrew word that was translated into the specific English word at the location in question. Once having identified the original language word, I then look at every occurrence of that word in the Greek or Hebrew to see the ways the word is used, and also consult works written for the purpose of original language study, such as Lexicons.My favorite type is the topical study, but the methods I use are based on principles that can be applied not only in these different studies, but can be applied to other historical literature as well as current literature.There are rules of interpretation than most conservative theologians agree upon. By and large, they look to me to be good common sense rules, so I try to stick to them. This minimizes the “that’s your interpretation” phenomenon, which is so silly. I prefer to have a good interpretation any day, than MY interpretation. Many of these rules come from traditional Jewish rules of interpretation. Now immediately, we must concede, that there are obviously limitations to these rules, or most Jews would have recognized their Messiah. The problem is, that we are human, we make mistakes, and we bring our own prejudices and preconceptions to the interpretive table. It is true for me, it is true for you also. So, sound rules are a foundation for understanding the Bible in a consistent manner, they are there to help you see past your own prejudices, but they will only work if you are willing to be consistent, and not change the rules to suit an interpretation you prefer.So what are some of these rules? In no particular order. Always examine a verse or passage in it’s contextThis means that you look at the verses leading up to that passage, and following, so that you can see what the cubject actually is, being discussed. Ignore the chapter heading and number, these are man-made, it is up to you to determine when a subject begins and ends. Examining a passage in context, also involves not just reading and understanding the nearby verses, but also identify who is being addressed in a passage, for whom is the message intended. Sometimes it is a specific individual, some times Israel, sometimes the church, sometimes it applies universally to mankind, determine this. The historical context is also important, Understanding things about a time and place, can affect how you understand the passage. Context, is one of the most important aspects of Biblical interpretation.Okay, suppose we have done all that. We have arrived at what we think the verse is saying and to whom. Remember that the scriptures are divinely inspired. Therefore, they will never contradict each other. We can use that to help us check our understanding of a verse or passage in question. The next rule is: Compare Scripture with ScriptureHere, we search out other passages on the same topic. For example, let’s say we examined the ten commandments, and saw there: “Thou shalt not kill.” We have now the understanding that it is always wrong to kill. However, as we read in other places in the Bible, we find that God ordains wars, and prescribes putting people to death for certain crimes. Knowing that the God does not contradict himself, we understand that we must have a faulty understanding of “thou shalt not kill”. This brings us to another rule of interpretation. Examine the Verse in the Original LanguageTime was when you had to own quite a library to follow all of these rules effectively. In modern times, there are theological libraries in the form of software, which are substantially less expensive than they would be in printed form. Additionally, many of these helps are online. Go and experiment with sites such as blueletterbible.org, biblestudytools.com, and/or biblehub.com. You will find many things to aid your understanding on those sites. In the case of thou shalt not kill, we would find that a better translation of the Hebrew would have been “You shall do no murder”.Another tool which is indispensable is a concordance. A concordance let’s you look up Bible verses by words that exist in English in the verse. For example, if you looked up the word “locusts”, you would discover the word occurs in 17 verses. The concordance would show you part of the verse - a partial context. This is useful if you want to find verses that have a word in common with a verse you are examining. Seeing the context, lets you see if the verse is related to the topic you are studying, or to the verse you are studying, In the Gospels for instance, the different authors some times have additional details that another Gospel writer left out. Perhaps you are wanting to find a particular verse you are thinking of, a concordance can be useful for that. This can also be done with online Bible search sites.The next ones are not rules, but recommendations. Read a passage in several translations. Translations are not all alike, nor equally good, and none is without error. Most are pretty good for casual reading of the scriptures, but by reading a passage in a different version, you can often uncover some nuance, that you may want to explore further.Additionally, it is a good idea to to read about a given passage in a commentary or two, or three. In that way, you reap the benefit of the work that someone has already put into understanding the passage you are looking at. Here again, none is without error. In fact, by reading commentaries, you may come across views you never considered. Consider them, but stick with the Bible text itself, which brings me to the next rule. Let Scripture Interpret ScriptureWhat do we mean by that? Sometimes a verse you may be considering, is already discussed in another passage in the Bible. Since the Bible is inspired by God, you have to accept the Bible’s explanation of itself. How would you know that a passage is commented on in another section in the Bible? My primary answer is read the Bible until you are familiar with it. I realize than not everyone will follow this advice, so there are other ways. The commentaries I spoke of, will often point such passages out. A good reference Bible, such as Thompson’s Chain Referance Bible, will show related passages - a very helpful tool. When reading a passage, assume it is literal, unless there is a compelling reason not to. In John 10:9 (NASB) Jesus says:“I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.”A literal translation of that would be to think of Jesus claiming to be a slab of wood on a hinge. There is no need to be so literal. The context of the passage will usually indicate what the author was saying. Parables and visions, similes and metaphors are frequently used in the bible. There is an excellent book on parable and metaphors, learn to spot them. Some times it may not be so obvious:John 11:11-15after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I go, that I may awaken him out of sleep.” 12 The disciples therefore said to Him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” 13 Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that He was speaking of literal sleep. 14 Then Jesus therefore said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead",(NASB) In the passage above, we see that even the disciples took things too literally. Understand the Historical Background This takes some digging, but it is most helpful to understand figures of speech, customs and historical circumstances surrounding a passage. Where is the author, why is he there? To whom is he writing and why? These type of things are very useful to stay aware of. For example, some passages are written directly to a person of a people, and may not apply universally. Strive to avoid interpreting through the eyes of your own experience and culture. A helpful tool for this is the book: "The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah" Keep with precedentsSome people love inventing new meanings for words. Understand what the words meant when they were written from the original languages, if you are working in your own language, understand the meaning of the word when they were translated. For example, you may run across the word “quick” in the King James Version. Quick meant ‘living’ or ‘alive’ in 1611, not ‘fast’. Many modern commentators have erred by insisting that certain words mean certain things that they did not mean when written, don’t make the same mistake and don’t make the mistake of assuming that what they say is true, do your own research. Use Common Logic This one seems like a no-brainer that I should not even have to mention. Ask yourself, if a given understanding of a passage makes sense. Be careful here though, not everyone thinks alike. When I say to ask if it makes sense, I don’t mean does it make sense to you! I mean is the conclusion a rational one given the words used, the circumstances etc. is it where the majority of scriptural evidence points you? Don’t make the mistake of using you logic to over-rule the plain revelation of scripture. For example, I don’t like hell. It makes no sense to me that such a place would exist, why punish someone eternally for things done during the short span of a lifetime. However, I must keep in mind, that my thoughts are not His thoughts, and my ways are not His ways, so, I go with what scripture plainly teaches - there is a Hell. Recognize and determine the validity of inference This is similar to the above. You may find it difficult, for example, to discover a verse that indicates God is a triune being. However, you might fine a verse that refers to a person known as the Holy Spirit, and that the person is called God. You might find a reference to the fact that there is a person called the Father, who is also called God. Then you may find a reference to a person who is called the Son, again, He is called God also. You will find verses that indicate the these person are distinct. You will also find versed that categorically state that there is only one God. Putting them all together, we realize that there are three separate persons who are each God, and there is only one God. Therefore, the three persons are the one God. That is inference. For some, this makes no sense, I have no problem with it. This is a case however, where you may have to suspend what you think is logic, and accept that this is what is revealed in scripture, we have no right to over-ride revelation with our opinions. Recognize the unity of scripture The 66 books that make up the Bible each has it’s own story to tell. However, there is one author behind each of them, and He has His story to tell as well. When you read and study the Bible, be aware that there are themes that thread their way through the various books of the Bible, some books cannot be fully understood without the benefit of the other books. If you have an interpretation of a passage, that is a contradiction to another passage, then you have not reached a correct understanding, for God does not contradict Himself.There may be more that I am forgetting, I will add them in if they occur to me, but that is the way that I approach the study of the scriptures, I hope some of these principles, are ones that you will find helpful in your own studies. Be Blessed! Ω Omegaman 2.0 This page has been visited 11,913 times since September 28th, 2008 5 Responses to “How I Study the Bible - one approach” Sharon Graham Says: December 12th, 2008 at 9:58 am Thank you for explaining how to study the bible it is a big help. FresnoJoe Says: February 28th, 2009 at 9:39 am “there is one author behind each of them, and He has His story to tell as well” Oh So Amen Dear Brother, So Amen! “Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,” Psalms 40:7 “Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.” Hebrews 10:7 AyinJade Says: March 2nd, 2009 at 7:27 pm Lol Mega, with a date of Sept 28th, you are always assured of having this post as the first one seen in the admin blogs. I had a hard time finding my latest blog entry until I realized that the date of this blog was incorrect. Omegaman Says: March 4th, 2009 at 3:09 am That is when it was posted, Sept. 28th, 2008 jayblayze Says: April 23rd, 2009 at 6:11 am Thanx for your thoughts and all the support at http://www.worthychat.com tonight april 23 You keep on speaking the truth will ya. Thanx again, Jamie
  6. As the title suggests,I want to know the characteristics of conservative Christianity ,which distinguish it from liberal Christianity. I know many people call themselves conservative Christians,But I really don't know the difference between them and more liberal Christians.
×
×
  • Create New...