Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
OK, I'll provide the context, then. Jesus is eating with some Pharisees. He notes their sinfulness - the fact that they look "clean" on the outside but are full of sin on the inside. He is blaming them for making a mockery of the sacrifice of all who have come before them through their uncleanliness. He is telling them that the sacrifices of the past are all on their heads.
...which is where the verse comes in. Jesus tells them "Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world." He repeats this thought by presenting a bookend of biblical martyrs representing "the time since the beginning of the world" - Abel to Zechariah.
The purpose of the scripture is NOT to proclaim the historicity of any character. The purpose is to stress to the Pharisees exactly whose sacrifices they are spitting on with their hypocrisy. I have heard, on many occasions, nonbelievers refer to Adam when specifying the beginning of humanity; they not proclaiming they believe in such a person, only in the symbol by which that person represents.
Jesus clearly acknowledges Abel from the book of Genesis to make His point. Jesus is not speaking a parable here. God even implies that Abel was murdered by using the phrase, "the blood of Abel." All of this is consistent with a historical understanding of Genesis.
Jesus clearly acknowledges Abel from the book of Genesis to make His point. Jesus is not speaking a parable here. God even implies that Abel was murdered by using the phrase, "the blood of Abel." All of this is consistent with a historical understanding of Genesis.
It is also consistent with a symbolic understanding of the creation account. The difference is that TEs have the evidence found in God's creation on their side.
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It is also consistent with a symbolic understanding of the creation account. The difference is that TEs have the evidence found in God's creation on their side.
Then, am I correct to assume that you believe that Jesus was referring to both a mythical figure and an historical figure together in the same breath to make His point in Lk 11:51?
Then, am I correct to assume that you believe that Jesus was referring to both a mythical figure and an historical figure together in the same breath to make His point in Lk 11:51?
And who are you to tell Him He can't?
The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.
[Luk 16:22-23 ESV]
__________________
And who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars? - Origen, 215AD [De Principiis 4.1.16]
Jesus clearly acknowledges Abel from the book of Genesis to make His point. Jesus is not speaking a parable here. God even implies that Abel was murdered by using the phrase, "the blood of Abel." All of this is consistent with a historical understanding of Genesis.
Regardless of the historical nature of Abel, Jesus' purpose here is obviously as symbol. He is referencing both time and sacrifice by choosing the characters he does. It really takes the scripture out of context to try and pin historical proof in it.
BTW, I'll trust that you believe Jesus used hyperbole outside of parables, assuming you still have both eyes and hands.
It is also consistent with a symbolic understanding of the creation account. The difference is that TEs have the evidence found in God's creation on their side.
No, they do not. They don't have any because there isn't any. All of the evidence, when all things are considered point to special creation by God just the way the Bible teaches it.
It is Moses and Jesus who told the truth about the origins of the world and life in it, not skeptical scientists who start with a wrong premise to begin with.
"Believing that what He inspired must be taken literally DOES NOT EQUAL not believing what He inspired."
In some cases it does. If the cross references to a certain historical event are referred to by several other writers of scripture and there is nothing in scripture to reveal that the event spoken of was NOT historical, then how can a believer justify it as non-historical?
Example: Adam and Eve sinned in Genesis 3. Was that historical? What do the writers of scripture say about their historicity?
1 Chron. 1:1 ¶ Adam, Sheth, Enosh,
The chronicler mentions him as the first human being in the human family tree.
Job 31:33 "If I covered my transgressions as Adam, by hiding mine iniquity in my bosom."
The author of Job confirms the ancient view of Adam's literal sin.
Luke 3:38 "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 places Adam as the first in Jesus family lineage. Did he insert a storybook tale character as part of that lineage?
Romans 5:14 "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses..."
Paul obviously took the life and transgression of Adam literally. Is there are hint in his writings that he thought otherwise? Scripture please?
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." I Corinth. 15:45
Did Paul base his theology of human sin on a mythical character and contrast him with the reality of eternal life in Jesus. If so, how empty!
1Timothy 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Is there a hint here that Adam & Eve were not real people who did what Moses described? No.
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Jude obviously took the chronology of Moses in Genesis 5 literally. There is certainly no hint in his words that the account was anything less.
If the cross references to a certain historical event are referred to by several other writers of scripture and there is nothing in scripture to reveal that the event spoken of was NOT historical, then how can a believer justify it as non-historical?
We apply the same accommodationist hermeneutic to the text that we apply when we read about the authors' belief in a flat-earth, geocentric solar system. If we're going to allow for man's limited perspective and understanding to enter into the Scripture's description of the universe, then to be consistent, we must also allow for man's limited perspective and understanding to enter into the Scripture's description of history, too.
__________________ We can allow satellites, planets, suns, universe, nay whole systems of universes, to be governed by laws, but the smallest insect, we wish to be created at once by special act.
Then, am I correct to assume that you believe that Jesus was referring to both a mythical figure and an historical figure together in the same breath to make His point in Lk 11:51?
He must have been.
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It is Moses and Jesus who told the truth about the origins of the world and life in it, not skeptical scientists who start with a wrong premise to begin with.
Moses and Jesus explained the existential purpose of our existence, they didn't try to explain the natural mechanisms of our universe. Science does try to explain the natural mechanisms of our universe, and it does a very good job of it. Something science cannot do is explain the existential purpose of the universe.
Praise God that He gave us both the bible and the ability to carry out scientific inquiry. I can't imagine why a Christian would want to forgo one of them.
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Linear Mode
