OEC and The New Heavens and New Earth

[OldSchool2]

 

That is not even English. It's a "word salad" that reads like a math question from an SAT.

Not only do you twist the words of others, you twist English itself into a pretzel.

That is complete nonsense.  The fact is that you aren't intepreting Scripture.  YOU are deciding on your own, with no biblical support that Gen. 1-3 is a parable.   There is no word salad in that at all.     You are assigning "parable" to the text to justify why you can't believe the Bible as written ...

 

What I don't believe is that the days of the creation story are literal days, but a literary device that simply, but profoundly explained creation to a then scientifically primitive society. In fact, it still does that today.

 

That means I don't have to argue for a young Earth, or contradict carbon dating, or deny a host of other scientific disciplines in order to satisfy a literalist interpretation of Genesis 1-3 when there are three other horses in the "Quadriga".

 

And as for biblical support, since Jesus is the logos of God who spoke through many parables in the New Testament, there's no reason to completely dismiss that He is doing the same in Genesis.

[Guest]

And as for biblical support, since Jesus is the logos of God who spoke through many parables in the New Testament, there's no reason to completely dismiss that He is doing the same in Genesis.

 

~

 

Torah~!

 

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

 

Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

 

But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

 

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Exodus 20:8-11

 

Torah Torah Torah~!

 

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Matthew 5:18

 

It's Just Not An Allegory Any More

 

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Romans 3:19-20

[Spock]

Of all who are on here I consider Shiloh one of the clearest of writing!His defense of Scripture is to place the authority on the write and not onthe reasoning of man... it is this he addresses and it is clear that heis correct! Love, Steven

Am I in your top 10? (I needs to know.)

An eager Spock

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

That is not even English. It's a "word salad" that reads like a math question from an SAT.

Not only do you twist the words of others, you twist English itself into a pretzel.

That is complete nonsense.  The fact is that you aren't intepreting Scripture.  YOU are deciding on your own, with no biblical support that Gen. 1-3 is a parable.   There is no word salad in that at all.     You are assigning "parable" to the text to justify why you can't believe the Bible as written ...

 

What I don't believe is that the days of the creation story are literal days, but a literary device that simply, but profoundly explained creation to a then scientifically primitive society. In fact, it still does that today.

 

 

Sorry, but they were not that primitive at all.  These ancients have built structures that demonsrate an advanced understanding of physics and engineering even by understanding.

 

The fact is that they understood things like "millions of years" and long epochs of time.   If had wanted to communicate that the days of creation were long periods of time, there were words in their language to say exactly that.    

 

The truth is that you are manufacturing the whole "literary device"  argument and you do with NO biblicical evidence.  The problem is that you are making a textual argument which demands textual evidence.  You have none.  There is NO credible basis for an argument that is made up out of whole cloth or pulled out of thin air.  Genesis 1 is not meant to be understood as a parable.   You can't provide one shred of textual evidence to the contrary.  That alone is testimony to the falseness of the "parable" claim.

 

That means I don't have to argue for a young Earth, or contradict carbon dating, or deny a host of other scientific disciplines in order to satisfy a literalist interpretation of Genesis 1-3 when there are three other horses in the "Quadriga".

 

Carbon dating isn't reliable.  It dates recently formed volcanic rock as being millions of years old.  It has been found to misdate the age of young trees only a few years old, dating them to be thousands of years old.  There are a plethora of examples of how carbon dating consistently produces erroneous dates for rocks and other materials.   There is no scientific discipline that has proven the age of the earth.  Even radiometric dating is seriously flawed and relies on erroneous assumptions.

 

The fact is that God is true to His word and He means exactly what He says.  The Bible is meant to be interpeted literally, not by subjective human opinions.  The Bible is God's word, and not some book you can treat like a smorgasboard.   You have overstepped your authority in attempting to revise God's word to suit your person preconceptions.

 

 

And as for biblical support, since Jesus is the logos of God who spoke through many parables in the New Testament, there's no reason to completely dismiss that He is doing the same in Genesis.

 

Yeah, there are plenty of reasons.   Jesus always explained His parables.   The text of Genesis, were it parabolic would also tell us the meaning of the parable.  But there is no indication of what the parable means.

 

You have taken upon yourself to assign the value of "parable" to the text of Genesis and you have furhter taken it on yourself  to manufacture the meaning of that parabolic value.    That is not interpretation.  That is YOU trying to revise the word of God and mold it around your liberal, unbiblical theology.

[enoob57]

Of all who are on here I consider Shiloh one of the clearest of writing!His defense of Scripture is to place the authority on the write and not onthe reasoning of man... it is this he addresses and it is clear that heis correct! Love, Steven

Am I in your top 10? (I needs to know.)

An eager Spock

I understand your disdain for this... as you hold to difference of belief on same

Scriptures. I have prayed for you sir that you would escape the binding that you

now hold yourself in and that you see clearly so to choose righteously the things

of God within His Word! Love, Steven

[Spock]

Of all who are on here I consider Shiloh one of the clearest of writing!His defense of Scripture is to place the authority on the write and not onthe reasoning of man... it is this he addresses and it is clear that heis correct! Love, Steven

Am I in your top 10? (I needs to know.)An eager Spock

I understand your disdain for this... as you hold to difference of belief on sameScriptures. I have prayed for you sir that you would escape the binding that younow hold yourself in and that you see clearly so to choose righteously the thingsof God within His Word! Love, Steven

Thank you Steven. I know you said that with good intentions and that you care for the things of God and that you truly care for me. I cannot find fault in this even though we may disagree on matters that I do not consider are major. God bless you Steven I am proud to be your brother in Christ.

Spock out

[enoob57]

When one speaks grace to one whom holds grace as the greatest treasure that is

here-> both are built up in Love to The Lord's Glory... thank you in this!

Love, Steven

[Spock]

When one speaks grace to one whom holds grace as the greatest treasure that ishere-> both are built up in Love to The Lord's Glory... thank you in this!Love, Steven

Oh, I also want to apologize for the insensitive remark I made earlier about me hoping to be in your top 10. That was meant to cute and funny because I like to smile and kid around, but I can see it coming across as being sarcastic. You and I are not close enough friends yet for you to know my true intentions, and although I didn't say those words to harm you, they easily could have been taken that way.

So again, I ask for your forgiveness on my carelessness of words. (Let's see, 70 times 7 is 490......I still have plenty more left on my card.)

Spock out

[enoob57]

Well I will set my face for forgiveness and prepare for the onslaught of straining

against my flesh ... it should be good for me!

[Organic Medicine]

 

; For Sheniy.

I didnt' use your quote because it gets too long,that is the with multi quotes,but you asked why I said "in heaven we don't stagnate",

and you wondered why I said that . Well it was a bit hyperbolic,but as children we saw the image of heaven with adam and eve

standing in a garden ,just standing .I remember some time ago ,a Young 'atheist' on a board said he did'nt want to go to heaven

anyway ,because he would be completely bored . I laughed ,but you can see it is one of the many false ideas that young,and not

so young have of 'life eternal' ,that they will be bored stiff (forever).

I used to think we'd sit on clouds and play the harp for all eternity, and that we'd like it because...it was heaven. Haha. 

 

I don't know what it will be like in heaven exactly, but I do know it will be awesome.

 

True, unfortunately we have all been probably guilty of carrying over some teachings in our Sunday School or Church that really are incorrect.  Like the three wise men being shown at the Nativity.  Scripture says, they came to Joseph and Mary's home when Jesus was a child, not an infant, Lk 2:9.  Nothing says there were 3 wise men, just says Magi, Lk 2:1.  There could have been more or less.  Also, Jesus changing Saul's name to Paul.  Did not happen.  In fact, whenever Jesus did address him it was always as Saul.  Saul was also known as Paul, because he was a Diaspora Jew and a Roman citizen, Acts 13:9.  There are others.  It just indicates how we all really need to search G-d's word and let Him teach us, particularly if we are holding on to some tradition that could be preventing us.

Are we reading the same article? I just read almost this exact thing yesterday. lol

Good stuff.