Science is great, but... How about we discuss some scripture?!

[KTatis]

The difference is, this is the Bible, not "a book."

Dude the Bible is a book. You cannot differentiate between the two. They are books and noting else. And please don't bring up 'holy' cause only God himself should be worthy of that title.

 

[Deamiter]

Wow. I would say that it is my impression that most of the TEs around here have a much higher level of respect for the Scriptures.

Indeed I wouldn't quite talk about the Bible as just another book, but neither would I elevate it as a unique source of truth in our following of God.

Well perhaps unique as it contains the only account we have of God on earth. However, in my study of the phrase "God's word" in reference to the Bible I found that nearly every use of the phrase (not where it's Logos or Jesus) it's talking about ongoing revelation. People are directly given God's word throughout the new testement and it seems unbiblical for us to put so much weight on these collected letters to the exclusion of God's other revelations.

It's a long subject and I just said I needed to get back to work. I recently wrote an email to my pastor about the subject and perhaps I'll start a new thread with an edited version when my life settles down a bit.

 

[KTatis]

Wow. I would say that it is my impression that most of the TEs around here have a much higher level of respect for the Scriptures.

It's the truth. 2000 year old book! But then again it was probably how i stated it.

 

[Deamiter]

Dude the Bible is a book. You cannot differentiate between the two. They are books and noting else. And please don't bring up 'holy' cause only God himself should be worthy of that title.

Perhaps, but the Bible IS indeed inspired by God. As I just said, it's not our sole source of inspiration as the Biblical example is to find truth through the Church -- a community of believers. That said, it is a primary source of truth and probably shouldn't be treated as "just another book."

 

[jeffweeder]

Science is great, but... How about we discuss some scripture?!

A mighty fine idea

God's Supreme Power Is 45
8 "Drip down, O heavens, from above,
And let the clouds pour down righteousness;
Let the earth open up and salvation bear fruit,
And righteousness spring up with it.
I, the LORD, have created it.
9 "Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker[7][Lit Fashioner ]—
An earthenware vessel among[8][Lit with ] the vessels of earth!
Will the clay say to the potter[9][Lit Fashioner ], 'What are you doing?'
Or the thing you are making say, 'He has no hands'?
10 "Woe to him who says to a father, 'What are you begetting?'
Or to a woman, 'To what are you giving[10][Lit in labor pains with ] birth?' "
11 Thus says the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker[11][Lit Fashioner ]: "Ask[12][Or Will you ask ] Me about the things to come concerning[13][Or upon ] My sons,
And you shall commit to Me the work of My hands.
12 "It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it.
I stretched out the heavens with My hands
And I ordained[14][Or commanded ] all their host.

 

[Scotishfury09]

You mean the geneologies that were clearly not ultra-historical as they followed the literary tradition of the surrounding culture of inflating ages?

I believe you posted an article about such inflations and I recall posting about how forced and unbiblical their math was.

The geneologies that come from a culture that many experts believe would have had no qualms about removing names to get just the right number of patriarchs in a geneology?

Link to an expert and their views on the matter, please?

There is nothing in the Bible that even hints that the Hebrew people were supposed to (or were) different from the surrounding cultures in terms of how they kept records. The Babylonians and Assyrians often traced their geneologies back to gods or other mythological characters not as a lie, but to show where they centered their loyalties and where they got their laws and morals.

Do you think the first quote in the OP was just casually mentioning that man was made first and man (as well as everything else) was made by God? Even in the Greek and Roman cultures it was hardly uncommon for people to trace their geneologies back to gods or semi-gods (like Hercules).

Ok, where do you see the transition from a mythical person to a real person? Surely you think someone in that genealogy was real. Abraham, maybe?

To understand what the authors meant by these passages often takes careful study of the culture of the area in which the passages were written. I certainly understand why people would come to the conclusion of YEC if they made no attempt to understand the context and culture of the Hebrew people in the ancient near east, but I don't think that excuses us from studying the historical context so as to have a solid base from which to form our Biblical interpretations!

I agree and can honestly say I have not done all the research and learning I would like to, but everyone's got to start somewhere. However, from what I've seen (and I've really only seen that one article you posted) there are still concerns for me.

 

[jeffweeder]

Ecc 12
11 The words of wise men are like goads, and masters of these collections are like well-driven nails; they are given by one Shepherd.
12 But beyond this, my son, be warned: the writing[7][Lit making ] of many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body.
13 The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person.
14 For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

A mighty fine idea

God's Supreme Power Is 45
8 "Drip down, O heavens, from above,
And let the clouds pour down righteousness;
Let the earth open up and salvation bear fruit,
And righteousness spring up with it.
I, the LORD, have created it.
9 "Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker[7][Lit Fashioner ]—
An earthenware vessel among[8][Lit with ] the vessels of earth!
Will the clay say to the potter[9][Lit Fashioner ], 'What are you doing?'
Or the thing you are making say, 'He has no hands'?
10 "Woe to him who says to a father, 'What are you begetting?'
Or to a woman, 'To what are you giving[10][Lit in labor pains with ] birth?' "
11 Thus says the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker[11][Lit Fashioner ]: "Ask[12][Or Will you ask ] Me about the things to come concerning[13][Or upon ] My sons,
And you shall commit to Me the work of My hands.
12 "It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it.
I stretched out the heavens with My hands
And I ordained[14][Or commanded ] all their host.

Nice quote...

But exactly how do you feel that this quote applies to the origins debate?

I can see how one could possibly twist this, but I am interested in how you are using this.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Interesting, in rereading this thread I find a creationists say lets talk about the Bible, but then they just throw up a few quotes with no explanation or commentary or even their opinions on what the quoted scriptures mean.

The only one who talks about the scriptures that he posted is a TE.

Is "talking about the Bible" some kind of YEC code speak meaning "let's throw up some random verses since we believe that TEs have never even read them or thought about them"?

Do you honestly think that no TE has ever seen these before and thought about them?

 

[Scotishfury09]

No, Lewis, we don't have some secret code.

I didn't add anything to the verses because I assumed it was understood what I thought of them. I wanted to discuss and debate what the TE's opinion was. I know for a fact that TEs have thought about the verses. I want to discuss their opinions.

As of right now, I haven't gotten to most of the posts here. I still have some from Deamiter and Xaero that I plan on replying to. This thread was created less than 2 hours ago and already has 29 replies. I can't work that fast.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

No, Lewis, we don't have some secret code.

I didn't add anything to the verses because I assumed it was understood what I thought of them. I wanted to discuss and debate what the TE's opinion was. I know for a fact that TEs have thought about the verses. I want to discuss their opinions.

As of right now, I haven't gotten to most of the posts here. I still have some from Deamiter and Xaero that I plan on replying to. This thread was created less than 2 hours ago and already has 29 replies. I can't work that fast.

Why do you assume that we even know what you think of these verses?

To me, if I were not once a YEC, the verses quoted would have me scratching my head wondering what they had to do with the topic.

It is only because I was once a YEC that I even have the slightest clue about how some of these are misused.

If you wish to talk about them, state your position first, that seems to be the most honest way to go about a discussion to me at least.

By just posting a random verse and waiting on others it appears to others that you are trying to bate a trap. This is a very dishonest way to start a discussion with people.

I do not know if you are doing this or not, but it would be best to be more upfront in your stance to avoid the appearance of deception or dishonesty.

 

[hithesh]

Mark 10:6 (Jesus speaking)
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Ah, so which came first the chicken or the egg?

The clay of the ground or man?

 

[gluadys]

Obviously I don't condone ceasing talking about science, but I think talking about the Bible might do us some good.


1 Corinthians 11:8,12 For the first man didn’t come from woman, but the first woman came from man. For although the first woman came from man, every other man was born from a woman, and everything comes from God.

1 Timothy 2:13-14 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

And... go!

What do you want to discuss about them? The first two exemplify Paul's patriarchal notions about the status of women vis-a-vis men. He seems at times to have had trouble believing what he himself wrote to the Galatians about there being neither male nor female in Christ.

The last expresses a fear that the Corinthians may be tempted away from Christ and uses the image of the serpent tempting Eve.

I don't know why you have underlined certain phrases. Do you find them especially significant? Why?

 

[cory533]

my first question is Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? If so then the questions about sourcing are irrelevant. If not why are we worrying about what some hebrews said thousands of years ago? The consistancy and accuracy to the origional documents can be shown to be the most accurately reproduced document of it's era. that does not make it the word of God just an accurate copy of an old document. If it is the word of God then saying God couldnot have made Paul and others of his time to understand the big bang theory is really a belittling veiw of God. If He knew my sins at the time of Christ's crusifixtion he knew about modern science and was not caught flat footed by "modern wisdom". are we talking about god or are we talking

about the one and only almighty GOD!!! the creator of the universe! the alpha and the omega. ? Either it is his word and he has and can keep it clean and accurate or it is not his word or he is just a little g god and irrelevant. If we can assume that it is his inerrent word then we can reson together about wether he ment it alagoricaly ,litterally or what.If it's just the words of men let's discuss "american Idol" it's more relevant.
Peace in Christ,
Cory

 

[jeffweeder]

Ah, so which came first the chicken or the egg?

Wouldnt it have to be 2 chickens-one male the other female?

 

[hithesh]

What do you want to discuss about them? The first two exemplify Paul's patriarchal notions about the status of women vis-a-vis men. He seems at times to have had trouble believing what he himself wrote to the Galatians about there being neither male nor female in Christ.

Have you ever read Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus? He's actually now a secular biblical scholar, but he was making the case that Paul's reference to subordinate role of woman, is in interpolation.

He shows some of the manuscripts have the order of those verses in different parts, and I believe one manuscript had it in the "notes". The other point Ehrman made is that if you remove the passage, you have concise scripture on the role of prophecy in the church, the reference to women's roles are actually out of place. The other letters of Paul, seem to show that he had an egalitarian view of women's place in the church, while these disputed verses seem to come off as contradictory to that.

His reasoning is sound, that's for sure.

 

[Assyrian]

Obviously I don't condone ceasing talking about science, but I think talking about the Bible might do us some good.


1 Corinthians 11:8,12 For the first man didn’t come from woman, but the first woman came from man. For although the first woman came from man, every other man was born from a woman, and everything comes from God.

Tell me, why would the order of Adam and Eve being made have anything to do with the relationship of a man and his wife today or even 2000 years ago? If it is a case of who was born first then my wife is a year older than I am. Paul is not talking about the logical consequence of a literal Adam and Eve but the allegorical meaning of Adam and Eve as an illustration of God's plan for marriage.

1 Timothy 2:13-14 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Why do YECs always seem to leave out the next verse?
1Tim 2:15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

Salvation though childbirth? Hazard free maternity? No, Paul is still looking at his allegorical exegesis of the Genesis story. Eve was deceived, and because she stood for women in the story, Paul was worried about newly converted Pagan women assuming positions of leadership and authority over their own husbands. But Genesis is it not all bad news for women. It is through Eve, through women, that God promised the Saviour.

2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

And... go!

Paul didn't realise the serpent was actually Satan? He must have. Rom 16:20 And the God of peace crush Satan under your feet speedily. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

Look at the context. 2Cor 11:2 I feel a divine jealousy for you, for I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ. 3 But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.

Paul is comparing one allegorical marriage, the church as the virgin bride of Christ to another more ancient allegorical marriage, the story of Adam and Eve and the allegorical serpent.

But remember, Paul told us about his approach in Romans 5:14. He saw Adam as a figure of Christ: Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. We should not be surprised if the same allegorical comparison of Adam and Christ comes up elsewhere in his epistles.

 

[Assyrian]

A mighty fine idea

God's Supreme Power Is 45
8 "Drip down, O heavens, from above,
And let the clouds pour down righteousness;
Let the earth open up and salvation bear fruit,
And righteousness spring up with it.
I, the LORD, have created it.
9 "Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker[7][Lit Fashioner ]—
An earthenware vessel among[8][Lit with ] the vessels of earth!
Will the clay say to the potter[9][Lit Fashioner ], 'What are you doing?'
Or the thing you are making say, 'He has no hands'?
10 "Woe to him who says to a father, 'What are you begetting?'
Or to a woman, 'To what are you giving[10][Lit in labor pains with ] birth?' "
11 Thus says the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker[11][Lit Fashioner ]: "Ask[12][Or Will you ask ] Me about the things to come concerning[13][Or upon ] My sons,
And you shall commit to Me the work of My hands.
12 "It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it.
I stretched out the heavens with My hands
And I ordained[14][Or commanded ] all their host.

Jeff, is is possible to strip out the [notes] from the quotes you post, unless of course they are directly relevant and you want to bring out a point. Your quotes are pretty unreadable the way you post them.

I am not sure the point you are trying to make. Presumably it is the arguing with our creator bit. But tell me is it arguing with my creator to suggest that verse 8 is not literal? Does righteousness actually fall like rain from heaven? Can salvation and righteousness grow in the earth like plants after rain? Or is it just possible that this was meant as a metaphor and you are actually arguing with God if you try to make everything he says literal?

So what is the problem? Is it I who made the earth, and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands. We believe God made the earth, created man and stretched out the heavens. I am sure you are not talking about God doing this with his 'hands'.

Is it that we disagree with Adam literally being made out of a lump of clay? Is this where we are arguing with God? Read the passage. It says we are all pots the potter has made out of clay. Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker. An earthenware vessel among the vessels of earth! Will the clay say to the potter, 'What are you doing?' Are you saying we argue with God if we don't take the making clay pots metaphor literally

 

[crawfish]

Obviously I don't condone ceasing talking about science, but I think talking about the Bible might do us some good.


1 Corinthians 11:8,12 For the first man didn’t come from woman, but the first woman came from man. For although the first woman came from man, every other man was born from a woman, and everything comes from God.

1 Timothy 2:13-14 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

And... go!

Well, the first thing to point out was that Paul didn't know any more of how the universe was created than the original writers of Genesis. In his mind, there was no need to accept the scripture any other way than simply by what it read.

Also, although TE's don't believe in a literal Genesis, we DO believe in the Truth behind the stories in it. When Paul uses the scriptures to make a point, the point is still entirely valid, in the same way a preacher might make a point using one of Jesus' parables. A non-literal reading does NOT invalidate Paul's points.

 

[Deamiter]

I believe you posted an article about such inflations and I recall posting about how forced and unbiblical their math was.

Eh? The only thing you showed was that their probability calculation was inaccurate (and I totally agree). I'm sure since you read the whole article you noticed that the majority of it was discussing the cultures around the ancient near east and how similar those cultures' treatment of geneologies is to the Biblical accounts.

I didn't see anything in your posts to suggest that their math was somehow unbiblical (what does that even mean? Which operations in particular do you find unbiblical, addition, multiplication?)

Ok, where do you see the transition from a mythical person to a real person? Surely you think someone in that genealogy was real. Abraham, maybe?

I see the transition throughout the Torah. You're looking for a hard switch from myth to historical when the cultural norm in the entire region changed slowly. The first thing you need to do is stop looking at the old testement from a 21st century point of view. Their genres and standards were very different from those we have today.