Australopithecines aren't "just" apes

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
what is the Bible? Does it have anything to do with God? Is there a God? How do we know there is or isn't a God?

The Jews and Muslim believe in YHWH. How do they know YHWH exists

2 Corin 3:14 But was calloused/epwrwqh <4456> (5681) the minds of them.
For until the today, the same covering upon the reading of the Old Covenant/Testament is remaining, no being up-covered/ana-kaluptomenon <343> (5746).
That In Christ it is being-taken-away

but yer quoting from the Bible, amigo. It has been said on this thread several times that the Bible is really almost mythical, and that it's ridicuilous to actually believe it. Or did i mis-read and mis-understand those posts?

 

[lucaspa]

I've never heard a Creationist claim John 1:1 refers to the Bible... in my experience they just blindly call the Bible "The Word" without thinking about the theological implications.

That's my experience also. The capitalize "Word" when referring to scripture, in that way elevating scripture to be equal to God. Basically, when they do that they are saying that their interpretation of scripture is now their god.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

but yer quoting from the Bible, amigo. It has been said on this thread several times that the Bible is really almost mythical, and that it's ridicuilous to actually believe it. Or did i mis-read and mis-understand those posts?

Ok. Let's look at wiki.

According to this most Jews view evolution in a continum of views.
I will have to read thru this when I have more time

Jewish views on evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jewish views on evolution includes a continuum of views about evolution, creationism, and the origin of life.

Today, most[citation needed] Jewish denominations accept the science of evolutionary theory and do not see it as incompatible with traditional Judaism, thus endorsing the stance of theistic evolution. It is often taught that "the Torah not be viewed as a textbook"[citation needed].

 

[brinny]

Ok. Let's look at wiki.

According to this most Jews view evolution in a continum of views.
I will have to read thru this when I have more time

Jewish views on evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jewish views on evolution includes a continuum of views about evolution, creationism, and the origin of life.

Today, most[citation needed] Jewish denominations accept the science of evolutionary theory and do not see it as incompatible with traditional Judaism, thus endorsing the stance of theistic evolution. It is often taught that "the Torah not be viewed as a textbook"[citation needed].

i am not Jewish, amigo.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

i am not Jewish, amigo.

But the verse I quoted concerned the Jews

 

[lucaspa]

what is the Bible? Does it have anything to do with God?

Are you being silly or serious?

The Bible is a collection of books that are basically the personal experience of people with deity. For instance, Exodus is the story of the Hebrews' experience with God as He freed them from servitude in Egypt.

So yes, the books of the Bible have a lot to do with God. Specifically, they have to do with Yahweh and Christ.

Is there a God? How do we know there is or isn't a God?

Those are different questions and I would urge you to start a new thread. You are getting into basic belief and how we know things.

Theists believe deity exists. Christians believe deity is Yahweh (God). The evidence we have for this are the personal experiences people have of God. These include the experiences written down in scripture but millions of people over the centuries have had personal experience of God.

Because not everyone has these personal experiences and because we do not have independent confirmation of what is written in scripture, people have a belief in God.

Of course, for people with convincing personal experience, those people "know" God exists, but that knowledge is not available to everyone else.

 

[brinny]

Are you being silly or serious?

The Bible is a collection of books that are basically the personal experience of people with deity. For instance, Exodus is the story of the Hebrews' experience with God as He freed them from servitude in Egypt.

So yes, the books of the Bible have a lot to do with God. Specifically, they have to do with Yahweh and Christ.



Those are different questions and I would urge you to start a new thread. You are getting into basic belief and how we know things.

Theists believe deity exists. Christians believe deity is Yahweh (God). The evidence we have for this are the personal experiences people have of God. These include the experiences written down in scripture but millions of people over the centuries have had personal experience of God.

Because not everyone has these personal experiences and because we do not have independent confirmation of what is written in scripture, people have a belief in God.

Of course, for people with convincing personal experience, those people "know" God exists, but that knowledge is not available to everyone else.

Are you saying some of the Bible is God-inspired, and some isn't. Is any of it? How do you know?

 

[lucaspa]

i am not Jewish, amigo.

But Genesis is a Jewish book. Written by Jews for Jews. So it might be useful to you to see how the people who were the original audience of Genesis view it. If you are going to differ from their view, you ought to have a very good reason.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

But Genesis is a Jewish book. Written by Jews for Jews. So it might be useful to you to see how the people who were the original audience of Genesis view it. If you are going to differ from their view, you ought to have a very good reason.

I would even venture to say the book of Revelation is also "Jewish". The author of it is also a Jew.......
Afterall, 12 of their Tribes are mentioned

Nation/Kingdom of Judah in bold

Reve 7:1. Judah = "I will praise YHWH" 2. Reuben = "He looked on my humliation" 3. Gad = "In raid" 4. Asher = "Happy am I" 5. Naphtali = "My wrestling" 6. Manasseh = "Making me to forget" 7. Simeon = "He hears me" 8. Levi = "and obligated me" 9. Issachar = "Gave me hire" 10. Zebulun = "a dowry" 11. Joseph = " he took away my reproach" 12. Benjamin = "by Son of His right hand"

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
i am not Jewish, amigo.

But Genesis is a Jewish book. Written by Jews for Jews. So it might be useful to you to see how the people who were the original audience of Genesis view it. If you are going to differ from their view, you ought to have a very good reason.

i was addressing the above post to my friend.

I embrace the entire Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. My comment, unfortunately, was mis-interpreted by you perhaps? I embrace the Jewish people and love them. I believe they are beloved of God. I financially support Jewish families to make their way to Israel, from around the world, to the country they love, Israel.

I also believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. Did i stumble onto a thread or forum where that is believed to be in error?

 

[lucaspa]

Are you saying some of the Bible is God-inspired, and some isn't. Is any of it? How do you know?

We already know that some of the Bible is not God-inspired. Paul tells us for I Corinthians 7 that he is speaking for himself alone; no inspiration by God.

Jesus tells us in Mark 10 and Matthew 14 that, at least, Deut. 24:1 was not God inspired, because Moses got it wrong.

You also have to remember the purpose of the Bible. It is a book about theology. Any history is only there to help the theological message. Trying to read the Bible as a science book violates the Rules of Interpretation (below).

What you do is use extrabiblical evidence and reason. And you always remember the Rules of Interpretation: Eight Rules of Interpretation
Apologetics research resources on religious cults and sects - The Eight Rules of Bible Interpretation
Apologetics research resources on religious cults and sects - Bible Interpretation

Three of those rules are:
Rule of Usage.
Don't add meaning to established words and terms. What was the common usage in the cultural and time period when the passage was written?
Rule of Context.
Avoid using words out of context. Context must define terms and how words are used.
Rule of Historical background.
Don't separate interpretation and historical investigation.

Basically, what these mean is that you have to understand what the text meant to the people of the time. You can't just approach it cold from 21st century America. Once you have the meaning for the people at the time, then you can see if there are other valid meanings for here and now.

Nor can you cut and paste isolated verses to make a story. Those verses must be in the context of their chapter and what they meant there. Otherwise you are cherry picking to make a story you already want to believe.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Ahhh well, LLOJ once again withdraws to lurk

 

[brinny]

We already know that some of the Bible is not God-inspired. Paul tells us for I Corinthians 7 that he is speaking for himself alone; no inspiration by God.

Jesus tells us in Mark 10 and Matthew 14 that, at least, Deut. 24:1 was not God inspired, because Moses got it wrong.

You also have to remember the purpose of the Bible. It is a book about theology. Any history is only there to help the theological message. Trying to read the Bible as a science book violates the Rules of Interpretation (below).

What you do is use extrabiblical evidence and reason. And you always remember the Rules of Interpretation: Eight Rules of Interpretation
Apologetics research resources on religious cults and sects - The Eight Rules of Bible Interpretation
Apologetics research resources on religious cults and sects - Bible Interpretation

Three of those rules are:
Rule of Usage.
Don't add meaning to established words and terms. What was the common usage in the cultural and time period when the passage was written?
Rule of Context.
Avoid using words out of context. Context must define terms and how words are used.
Rule of Historical background.
Don't separate interpretation and historical investigation.

Basically, what these mean is that you have to understand what the text meant to the people of the time. You can't just approach it cold from 21st century America. Once you have the meaning for the people at the time, then you can see if there are other valid meanings for here and now.

Nor can you cut and paste isolated verses to make a story. Those verses must be in the context of their chapter and what they meant there. Otherwise you are cherry picking to make a story you already want to believe.

Is the book of Genesis fiction?

 

[lucaspa]

but yer quoting from the Bible, amigo. It has been said on this thread several times that the Bible is really almost mythical, and that it's ridicuilous to actually believe it. Or did i mis-read and mis-understand those posts?

Oh yes, you misunderstood the posts. What is being talked about is the interpretation of a few chapters, not the entire Bible.

That particular interpretation for those chapters (usually Genesis 1-8) is wrong: those chapters do not describe accurate history.

But does that make them wrong? NO. There are different types of truth. Are the theological messages in Genesis 1-8 correct? We believe so based on evidence and reason. And no, we do not know for sure. That tentativeness is why Christianity is a faith.

 

[brinny]

Oh yes, you misunderstood the posts. What is being talked about is the interpretation of a few chapters, not the entire Bible.

That particular interpretation for those chapters (usually Genesis 1-8) is wrong: those chapters do not describe accurate history.

But does that make them wrong? NO. There are different types of truth. Are the theological messages in Genesis 1-8 correct? We believe so based on evidence and reason. And no, we do not know for sure. That tentativeness is why Christianity is a faith.

interpretation? Whose? Man's? Inexplicably, limited, finite, man? are you serious?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

*snip*

We already know that some of the Bible is not God-inspired. Paul tells us for I Corinthians 7 that he is speaking for himself alone; no inspiration by God.

Jesus tells us in Mark 10 and Matthew 14 that, at least, Deut. 24:1 was not God inspired, because Moses got it wrong.

I found this site interesting when I came across it some years back, [but mainly interested in his commentary of the supposed false prophecies of Daniel].

This is not to create doubt within Christians concerning the Bible and YHWH, but to better understand what the Bible is and isn't about. Thoughts?

A Witness to Yahweh ... the Bible pages. Index. A critical examination of the Bible and faith (focusing on source criticism, literary criticism, redaction criticism, form criticism, and historical criticism)

DID MOSES WRITE THE BOOKS OF THE TORAH IN THE BIBLE? Who wrote the Bible?
DID MOSES
WRITE THE FIRST
FIVE BOOKS OF
THE BIBLE

 

[lucaspa]

Is the book of Genesis fiction?

Yes and no. Let's take this out of Genesis so we can, perhaps, get rid of some of the emotional baggage. Let's look at Shakespeare's Macbeth. It's still a popular play today. Why? Because it deals with truths about human nature: greed, lust for power, guilt, justice, etc. It is set in a purely fictional Scottish history. That history never happened. Yet the truths about human nature are still true, aren't they? Of course they are.

Genesis deals with theological truths. The two creation stories in Genesis 1-3 are fictional in that creation did not happen that way. But they are truthful (or we believe they are) in the theology they teach: there is only 1 God, that God created the heavens and the earth, each and every human at some time in their life disobeys God, getting enough knowledge will not make you God, etc.

The story of Cain and Abel also tell a theological story and human truths. But they are not historical people. The flood is probably based on a historical event, but the stories in Genesis 6-8 are mostly fictional. There was no Ark that had 2 (or 7) of every living creature on board.

The rest of Genesis, which is the story of Abraham, may or may not have historical elements. Probably there are. There is archeological evidence to suggest that a Semite (Joseph) rose to high office in Egypt, for instance. But again, any historical accuracy is incidental to the main purpose of Genesis: theology. The authors don't care about historical accuracy. They care about theological accuracy. Just like Shakespeare cared about human truths, not about Scottish history.

 

[brinny]

I found this site interesting when I came across it some years back, [but mainly interested in his commentary of the supposed false prophecies of Daniel].

This is not to create doubt within Christians concerning the Bible and YHWH, but to better understand what the Bible is and isn't about. Thoughts?

A Witness to Yahweh ... the Bible pages. Index. A critical examination of the Bible and faith (focusing on source criticism, literary criticism, redaction criticism, form criticism, and historical criticism)

DID MOSES WRITE THE BOOKS OF THE TORAH IN THE BIBLE? Who wrote the Bible?
DID MOSES
WRITE THE FIRST
FIVE BOOKS OF
THE BIBLE

I look to the living God, the Author of His living Word, that is like a sword, cutting through the marrow and sinew. It records the mind of God.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Is the book of Genesis fiction?

Yes and no. Let's take this out of Genesis so we can, perhaps, get rid of some of the emotional baggage. Let's look at Shakespeare's Macbeth. It's still a popular play today. Why? Because it deals with truths about human nature: greed, lust for power, guilt, justice, etc. It is set in a purely fictional Scottish history. That history never happened. Yet the truths about human nature are still true, aren't they? Of course they are.

Genesis deals with theological truths. The two creation stories in Genesis 1-3 are fictional in that creation did not happen that way. But they are truthful (or we believe they are) in the theology they teach: there is only 1 God, that God created the heavens and the earth, each and every human at some time in their life disobeys God, getting enough knowledge will not make you God, etc.

The story of Cain and Abel also tell a theological story and human truths. But they are not historical people. The flood is probably based on a historical event, but the stories in Genesis 6-8 are mostly fictional. There was no Ark that had 2 (or 7) of every living creature on board.

The rest of Genesis, which is the story of Abraham, may or may not have historical elements. Probably there are. There is archeological evidence to suggest that a Semite (Joseph) rose to high office in Egypt, for instance. But again, any historical accuracy is incidental to the main purpose of Genesis: theology. The authors don't care about historical accuracy. They care about theological accuracy. Just like Shakespeare cared about human truths, not about Scottish history.

You sound uncertain.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I look to the living God, the Author of His living Word, that is like a sword, cutting through the marrow and sinew. It records the mind of God.

AMEN! Preach it sister

Hebrew 4:12 For living the Word of YHWH and in-working/energhV <1756> and keener over every blade/knife/macairan <3162> two-mouthed, and penetrating to parting of soul and of spirit, joints besides and marrows, and judge of feelings and of in-minds/thoughts of heart