Hermanuetics Basics

[Retrobyter]

On 11/25/2016 at 5:50 AM, inchrist said:

Have you not looked at China?

Shalom, inchrist.

All one has to do is look at the numbers: When one considers the ppmv (or mg/m³) figures of what human consumption produces vs. the ppmv of a SINGLE VOLCANO, one can see that the volcano DWARFS the human contribution! Now, that's not to say that we shouldn't do our part to maintain God's earth of which we are made its caretakers, but the truth is that we've been "sold a bill of goods" when our politicians go overboard on the human contribution to the earth's air pollution. We're NOT all that! (Humanism pops up everywhere!)

What has happened to the human race is that we aren't living according to God's instructions:

Genesis 8:15-17
15 And God spake unto Noah, saying,
16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.
17 Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.
KJV

We, like the animals, were to spread out on the earth and multiply. He did NOT say to congregate in cities! With high concentrations of population come crime, diseases, social problems (including homosexuality), and poverty! It's also the number one reason why there are higher concentrations of pollutants in and around cities!

[enoob57]

one of the things I have tried to show people hermeneutic need:
I copied a statement and circulated it- it read
                                "Come over here and sit on my lap baby."

Because of the sexual focus of most people I found unique responses... then I laid out the context _ a father speaking across the room to small weeping child.

[Retrobyter]

10 hours ago, inchrist said:

Despite its small concentration, CO2 is a potent greenhouse gas which plays  a vital role in regulating our earths surface temperature 

Shalom, inchrist.

Sure, but have you ever considered that the amount of CO₂ in our ecosystem is LESS than it was before the Flood?

[Guest BacKaran]

The whole world was different before the flood......

[Retrobyter]

2 hours ago, BacKaran said:

The whole world was different before the flood......

Shalom, BacKaran.

Sure, but...

Genesis 1:31
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
KJV

Genesis 2:4-6
4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
KJV

Thus, the CO₂ levels of the original Creation, which were higher than those of today, were BETTER than the CO₂ levels today! Remember: CO₂ is only harmful to animal life WHEN plant life is depleted! Plants NEED CO₂ to survive, just like animal life needs O₂ to survive!

And, the rapid oxidation process of burning with fire produces CO₂ and needs O₂ to continue. The answer is to INCREASE our plant life!

O₂ (oxygen) --> animal life (and fire) --> CO₂ (carbon dioxide) + sunlight --> plant life --> O₂ (oxygen) --> ... .

That's the life cycle! In fact, if the oxygen is depleted in the process of burning, one gets the poisonous gas, carbon MONoxide:

O₂ + 2C --> 2CO!

The first occupation given to our original ancestors was CARETAKER of plants, particularly the TREES! When ejected from Gan-Eden, they were still to maintain the plant life and the animal life, as seen in the occupations of their children! They were FARMERS and HERDSMEN! They were NOT to congregate in cities, but were to spread out and multiply! Only in these two occupations, FARMING and ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, is there true growth and therefore true wealth. All other occupations merely USE and MANIPULATE the growth that these two occupations produce.

However, the ecosystem of this planet, a relatively CLOSED system except for the influx of the energy from the sun, is a BALANCING ACT of cycles! And, I choose to recognize God's power in the cycles that He produced in Creation OVER the "power" of human beings to destroy those cycles.

I choose to listen to the scientists who DENY the "global warming effect" theory! For a list of these scientists, one can go to this list of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming. The mainstream "scientific" assessment has a POLITICAL agenda!

[Guest BacKaran]

And, since none of us lived in the pre flood days, all we can do is guess about any level of anything in that time period.

There is no global warming it climate change dilemma, it's just called weather.

And as God tells us in the bible, we are in the end days, the weather will get worse etc but it's not because of nature, it's all because of man's sin.

This is going to get interesting to see how believers react when under pressure from all sides.

I pray we all stand firm in Christ!?

 

[Retrobyter]

On 12/16/2016 at 0:28 AM, inchrist said:

Yes the earth was very good preflood.....however post flood not so very good.

With the earth being tropical preflood there is no indication in scripture that there were polar ice caps, in fact if the earth was very tropical preflood there would not have been any ice caps or if possible hardly the same size we have them today.

Nor is there any recordings of hurricans and tornados preflood, certainly any changes in our climate system would increase such weather phenomenon.

We have a completely different climate to what it was back then, we have different vegetations, ones that are senstive to our climate, not preflood climate.

Shabbat shalom, inchrist.

That doesn't change the fact that the higher concentrations of the "greenhouse gas," CO₂, carbon dioxide, is NOT a "contaminant!" It's a GOOD thing, ENCOURAGING the growth of plant life! If anything, it's presence in higher concentrations should simply encourage us to grow more plants! If it's a "pollutant" at all, it's only to those areas of high populations, high industry, and reduced vegetation. Plants WILL reduce the concentration of CO₂ in the presence of sunlight.

Thus, the higher concentrations of CO₂ should NOT be interpreted as a "pollutant." That's all I'm saying.

Oh, and we don't have "different vegetations." It's the same plants as before, just fewer of them, perhaps. You could say the concentrations of plants have been reduced. THAT'S the problem! NOT "global warming!"

[whatdoIwant2callmyself]

On 11/23/2016 at 2:32 AM, Openly Curious said:

What does this have to do with the "Biblical Doctrine" forum?

I ask because there is no biblical doctrine introduced in which to discuss. 

Hermanuetics is not a biblical or scriptural doctrine found in the bible to preach or teach.

Isaiah 28:9-11-Whom shall he teach knowledge?  and whom shall he make to understand doctrine; them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.  For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:  For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

 God has chosen the foolishness of preaching the cross of Christ and him crucified to save the lost (1 Corinthians 1:18-31 & 2:6-16).  Preaching or prophesying in your own tongue (language) for edification and understanding while under the anointing and power of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 14:19-25).  The Word of God and the truth has to be "rightly divided" therefore one has to study it to show themselves approved (2 Timothy 2:15). 

I think just coming into this thread and reading such attitudes as yours and another here first off, that it would probably help to assuage the animus if Hermeneutics was defined for you. This way you would know what it is the OP is talking about and can then proceed from a place of peace and the knowledge you do not currently have.

 

Bible, Hermeneutics

The science of interpreting the Bible (or any piece of literature) is called hermeneutics. The word comes from a Greek word, hermeneuo , which means to interpret or to explain. Interpreting the Bible is not a simple process of reading what has been written. The art of biblical interpretation developed slowly. See Bible, History of Interpretation .

Hermeneutics defined continues

[Openly Curious]

10 hours ago, whatdoIwant2callmyself said:

Quote

I think just coming into this thread and reading such attitudes as yours.....

And just what are those attitudes of mine you are referring too....   especially in my first post in which you quoted.  Do you disagree with the scripture I used in the post or something?

Quote

first off, that it would probably help to assuage the animus if Hermeneutics was defined for you.  This way you would know what it is the OP is talking about......

For your personal knowledge I am very aware of what hermeneutics is all about and how it is suppose to work.  Also I did and do know what it is the OP is talking about as I am not confused in the least.  Hermeneutics is not a biblical doctrine taught in the word so I thought it strange it was posted in the doctrinal section forum for that reason.

Quote

and can then proceed from a place of peace and the knowledge you do not currently have.

Are you accusing me of starting strife within this thread???  Or are you just trying to single me out for your own cause???   

You don't know me and it is very obvious in the things you have said about me.   

However I do not believe interpreting the doctrines in the bible is a "science" nor is it an "art" that has slowly developed over the years.   It is as Isaiah prophesied it would be in the last days.  It takes the Holy Spirit our Teacher to lead and guide us into all truth. Hermeneutics without the Holy Spirit can lead to false interpretations. It isn't fullproof and those who use it can come to wrong conclusions and we must be careful what we hear and receive as 100% truth.

I am also aware that hermeneutics itself comes from pagan origin and those theories of methodology have only been turned and applied to bible interpretation or biblical hermeneutics in our day.

Some use the literal approach, some use the moral approach, some use the allegorical approach and some use the anagological approach as their method of interpreting the bible.  And one wonders why so much false doctrines.  Each method alone provides different interpretations so you tell me which one do you believe in as truth when every one is saying different things using what they call is proper hermeneutics.

 

[Retrobyter]

1 hour ago, inchrist said:

Sure I have no issues with the animals on the ark pooping the world over with seeds from the previous world....however those plants regenerated in a different world with a different climate and would be sensitive to their new environment, an environment with tornadoes and hurricanes...a world with vast polar icecaps.

This is currently being looked at [for] a green belt across the northern half of Africa, and you [can] thank the climate changers for such a great initiative. 

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/03/africas-green-belt-gets-greenbacks-to-halt-spreading-sahara/

Shabbat shalom, inchrist.

Seeds are amazingly armored shells for the life within them. Some seeds can last hundreds of years, apparently dead, and then sprout new life under the right conditions, proving that they were merely lying dormant all that time. Much was said about the seed coats during God's creation of plant life.

Genesis 1:9-13
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
KJV

Whether distributed by the feces of an animal or not, the plants of the previous earth survived, even in the aftermath of a year-long, global Flood. However, life only comes from life. The plants for this second earth and its second atmosphere came from the genetic makeup of the first earth and its first atmosphere. We are NOT told of God using any new, creative power (Hebrew: baaraa') in the remaking (Hebrew: `aasaah) of the earth and sky.

10 hours ago, inchrist said:

Unfortunately, arguments like this have made the church look extremely foolish....the church needs to get over the fact we are not living in a pre-flood environment with vastly different climates that affect a vastly different environment.

Actually, ANY arguments presented by "the churches" with less than a scholarly presentation make "the churches" look foolish. We need to have a Ravi Zacharias mentality when presenting our positions.

10 hours ago, inchrist said:

I'm all for championing climate change. I like the initiatives that have come out of it like job creation, getting people to be more responsible with the planet. I like the changes, regulations and standards that have been set for companies like ISO 14001, ISO 50000 and carbon management.

Truth be told, I do, too! HOWEVER, that's because we answer to a HIGHER AUTHORITY! It is our responsibility to HIM to protect this earth, but the standards produced by the International Organization for Standardization (the ISO) are strictly from a HUMANISTIC perspective! As such, they have come to erroneous conclusions and have FORCED their conclusions on the whole civilized world, even to the extent that any scientists who disagree with their conclusions are ostracized from the intellectual community! This arrogance cannot and must not go unchallenged!

We who name the Messiah as our Savior and Lord should have come out with these initiatives a LOT sooner than the ISO did, but, as usual, we are about 10-20 years behind the unregenerate world!

As a side note, reviewing the ISO 14001:2015 documents, I saw a picture of a large field covered with solar panels. It occurred to me that the green grass under and surrounding these solar panels was actually far more efficient in converting the solar energy to chemical energy than the solar panels were in converting the solar energy to electrical energy! Ironic isn't it?