Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 7 minutes ago, one.opinion said: This is... again... false. I believe God is saying something different from what you believe He is saying. You and I disagree on interpretation. We both agree on the fact that God does not lie. No, you simply reject what God says. You are adding to the Scriptures what you would prefer God to be saying. God isn't speaking cryptically. The Hebrew is very straight forward and easy to understand. You are doing what liberals always do when you try to muddy the water about what the Bible really says. And if God doesn't lie, then the earth was created in 6 24 hour days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,064 Content Per Day: 7.97 Reputation: 21,392 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted November 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, one.opinion said: Why not let God be the judge of that instead of appointing yourself? The Word dictates to the reader... It's The Scriptures that demand the interpretation and has been shown why. 3 minutes ago, Scott Free said: The term "they" clearly demonstrating a lack of understanding of the complexity of the issue at hand and fails to see the great diversity of perspectives that unite under the umbrella of faith, repentance and hope in Jesus Christ. The current ultra-literal interpretations that lead to young earth creationism are not required by the text and has no impact or relevance to our Christian practices. The Word dictates to the reader... It's The Scriptures that demand the interpretation and has been shown why. The absolute is Genesis historical record given to Moses for mankind to know how He was brought about and the why of sin he has began in... This really nails down the Biblical interpretative perspective of a literal historic understanding of Genesis 1-11 https://answersingenesis.org/hermeneutics/is-genesis-1-literal-literalism-or-literalistic/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Free Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 88 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 1,274 Content Per Day: 0.62 Reputation: 287 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/15/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 (edited) 30 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: The literal interpretation is the only correct and the only truly Christ honoring approach to the text. If you love Jesus, you will interpret the text literally. Using my love for Jesus Christ to manipulate me into accepting your interpretation is not a good debate strategy. Edited November 16, 2018 by Scott Free 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,064 Content Per Day: 7.97 Reputation: 21,392 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted November 16, 2018 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Scott Free said: Using my love for Jesus Christ to manipulate me in to accepting your interpretation is not a good debate strategy. The beginning is unique in the very fact of itself The God Who has made it does not have it thus that which began must receive the dictate of that which Did Not. Thus any child with this naturally in them, (child like humility), will read and come away with how God did it... the perversion of this The Lord spoke of 'unless you become as one of these' How do I know this is the litmus test of all this Because Job was rebuked of God in the very same sense and way of Gen 1 'where were you when I commanded' 1 Cor 1:27-31 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: 29 That no flesh should glory in his presence. 30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: 31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. KJV Mark 10:15 15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. KJV Luke 3:38 Rom 5:14 1 Cor 15:22 1 Cor 15:45 1 Cor 15:45 1 Tim 2:13 1 Tim 2:14 Jude 14 These verse are hinged on a literal historical account and the hinge can only swing one way! Every child gets it I have investigated it and know it is true... Edited November 16, 2018 by enoob57 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.11 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 23 minutes ago, enoob57 said: These verse are hinged on a literal historical account Most of these verses indicate a literal Adam and Eve, which I do not dispute. 1 hour ago, Scott Free said: Using my love for Jesus Christ to manipulate me into accepting your interpretation is not a good debate strategy. Agreed, it's was a rather absurd assertion that is completely useless in proving a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Scott Free said: Using my love for Jesus Christ to manipulate me into accepting your interpretation is not a good debate strategy. I am not manipulating at all. It's the truth. Why would anyone who loves Jesus take His word and treat it so irresponsibly. And it isn't "my" interpretation. Interpretation, by definition is always "literal." There is no such thing as a "figurative" interpretation. Interpretation has only ONE purpose, and that is to arrive at the literal understanding conveyed by the author. You are misusing the concept of interpretation to get around what the Bible says. That is not what followers of Jesus do. You can either believe God or believe in the lie of Evolution and call God a liar and live with an incoherent theology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,064 Content Per Day: 7.97 Reputation: 21,392 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted November 16, 2018 17 minutes ago, one.opinion said: Most of these verses indicate a literal Adam and Eve, which I do not dispute. So what do you use to determine what is literal and what is not... I do not find in text anything to say both! It is either taken as historic literal or other by readers? However the text itself within it's own confines allows only for historical literal as to divert from must come from outside the context..... so can you show me in the Bible text that pin points to this allowance of none historic literal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Free Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 88 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 1,274 Content Per Day: 0.62 Reputation: 287 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/15/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 9 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: I am not manipulating at all. It's the truth. Why would anyone who loves Jesus take His word and treat it so irresponsibly. And it isn't "my" interpretation. Interpretation, by definition is always "literal." There is no such thing as a "figurative" interpretation. Interpretation has only ONE purpose, and that is to arrive at the literal understanding conveyed by the author. You are misusing the concept of interpretation to get around what the Bible says. That is not what followers of Jesus do. You can either believe God or believe in the lie of Evolution and call God a liar and live with an incoherent theology. You are entitled to your choice. If you think taking the creation stories in a ultra-literal way is best, by all means enjoy this understanding. Calling me a lair and incoherent without even knowing what I actually believe causes me not to take you seriously. To avoid further abuse I am going to ignore you now. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be always in your heart. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 6 minutes ago, Scott Free said: You are entitled to your choice. If you think taking the creation stories in a ultra-literal way is best, by all means enjoy this understanding. There is no such thing as "ultra-literal." You either believe the Bible literally, or you don't believe it at all. If God wanted us to understand Him differently than how He has written, it would have been simple to do. It is possible, in Hebrew" to communicate the evolutionary theory of creation IF that is the understanding we are supposed to take from the text. But, the text is unambiguously anti-Evolution to anyone willing to be honest about what it says and the grammatical structure of the Hebrew. When one has to allegorize the text, that is an indication that they don't believe what the Bible says, pure and simple. Quote Calling me a lair and incoherent without even knowing what I actually believe causes me not to take you seriously. Maybe you might try reading what I said. I never called you a liar and I never said that you are incoherent. I said that you will end up with an incoherent theology and that your liberal approach to the text and denying what it clearly says is to call God a liar. Quote To avoid further abuse I am going to ignore you now. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be always in your heart. That's fine. You can ignore me, but if you continue to post this garbage, I will be here to counter it whether you respond to me or not, so that no one is led astray by your false teachings and your sloppy theology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 16, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.11 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2018 2 hours ago, enoob57 said: So what do you use to determine what is literal and what is not... I do not find in text anything to say both! It is either taken as historic literal or other by readers? However the text itself within it's own confines allows only for historical literal as to divert from must come from outside the context..... so can you show me in the Bible text that pin points to this allowance of none historic literal? Genesis is the only book of the Bible that deals with events when no humans were present. Why shouldn't it be a unique form of literature in the Bible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts