Is the Bible reliable?

[Melethiel]

Restoremysoul, no one is a Darwinist. Except I suppose Darwin, who is dead.

People who believe in the unity of knowledge and generally have no issues with modern science, or who believe that ways of reading the Bible that come out of the eraly 20th century are wrong, are not necessarily opposed to faith. Here on CF, you will find that many of them are very faithful, and many such people are scholars or theologians who spend their whole lives reading and contemplating God's word.

Your assumption that the two are in some kind of fundamental opposition is just incorrect.

What is more, when you tell people that something like this is actually incompatible with Christianity, you drive people away from Christ. It is very common for people today in western nations who have no religious background to not even bother to consider it, because they believe those who tell them that Christians must be literalist creationists.

There hear it from people like you and BobRyan, and they hear it from people like Dawkins, and so they think it is true, and they never have even a chance to know Christ. And that is really the point of the whole thing - not adhering to some modern interpretation of how to read the Bible.

I second this. At one of my previous churches, there was a girl who was interested in Christianity and going through the information class. When we got to the point where the pastor insisted in literalist creationism (this girl was a biology major), we never saw her again. All for something that has nothing to do with the Gospel. It is shameful how many people are driven away because they think Christianity makes them check their brain at the door.

 

[Standing Up]

I second this. At one of my previous churches, there was a girl who was interested in Christianity and going through the information class. When we got to the point where the pastor insisted in literalist creationism (this girl was a biology major), we never saw her again. All for something that has nothing to do with the Gospel. It is shameful how many people are driven away because they think Christianity makes them check their brain at the door.

It is tough to humble oneself, to ask God for an explanation as it were.

 

[Tzaousios]

You tell us. How do you interpret one as literal and the other as "wooden"? What's your standard?

Let me guess, anything different than "Scripture + whatever bit of tradition Standing Up happens to accept on this particular issue (even though it is really just Standing Up's chosen interpretation of Scripture in actual practice)" is going to be met with "C/U around."

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Genesis isn't poetry imo nor is it exact history. It's types and seeds that grow thru the bible and are developed fully in Revelations.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

Restoremysoul, no one is a Darwinist. Except I suppose Darwin, who is dead.

People who believe in the unity of knowledge and generally have no issues with modern science, or who believe that ways of reading the Bible that come out of the eraly 20th century are wrong, are not necessarily opposed to faith. Here on CF, you will find that many of them are very faithful, and many such people are scholars or theologians who spend their whole lives reading and contemplating God's word.

Your assumption that the two are in some kind of fundamental opposition is just incorrect.

What is more, when you tell people that something like this is actually incompatible with Christianity, you drive people away from Christ. It is very common for people today in western nations who have no religious background to not even bother to consider it, because they believe those who tell them that Christians must be literalist creationists.

There hear it from people like you and BobRyan, and they hear it from people like Dawkins, and so they think it is true, and they never have even a chance to know Christ. And that is really the point of the whole thing - not adhering to some modern interpretation of how to read the Bible.

Its wrong to agree with anything that robs glory from God. Has God not made the wisdom of this world foolishness? And what does science do? It causes just as many problems as it seems to fix, so in reality its futile. And the reason its futile is because is refuses to give God glory and so it does not have Gods blessing, therefore it is futile, its a circle of madness, it creates just as many problems as it fixes.

Do you think that God will allow man to take His glory? Man is just the creation but he thinks that he is the master. Has God not made the wisdom of this world foolishness? If we consider how foolish man is by not giving God glory, and if we consider how futile science is when it doesn't give God glory, then we can see how utterly foolish it really is. How can we agree with men like that? What part has a believer with an unbeliever?



2 Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? 15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? 16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

“I will dwell in them
And walk among them.
I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.”[c]
17 Therefore

“Come out from among them
And be separate, says the Lord.
Do not touch what is unclean,
And I will receive you.”[d]
18 “I will be a Father to you,
And you shall be My sons and daughters,
Says the Lord Almighty.”[e]

2 Corinthians 7 Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

Isaiah 42:5 Thus says God the Lord,
Who created the heavens and stretched them out,
Who spread forth the earth and that which comes from it,
Who gives breath to the people on it,
And spirit to those who walk on it:
6 “I, the Lord, have called You in righteousness,
And will hold Your hand;
I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people,
As a light to the Gentiles,
7 To open blind eyes,
To bring out prisoners from the prison,
Those who sit in darkness from the prison house.
8 I am the Lord, that is My name;
And My glory I will not give to another,
Nor My praise to carved images.
9 Behold, the former things have come to pass,
And new things I declare;
Before they spring forth I tell you of them.”
Praise to the Lord
10 Sing to the Lord a new song,
And His praise from the ends of the earth,
You who go down to the sea, and all that is in it,
You coastlands and you inhabitants of them!
11 Let the wilderness and its cities lift up their voice,
The villages that Kedar inhabits.
Let the inhabitants of Sela sing,
Let them shout from the top of the mountains.
12 Let them give glory to the Lord,
And declare His praise in the coastlands.
13 The Lord shall go forth like a mighty man;
He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war.
He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud;
He shall prevail against His enemies.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

Acts 17:30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent,

 

[MoreCoffee]

Genesis isn't poetry imo nor is it exact history. It's types and seeds that grow thru the bible and are developed fully in Revelations.

It isn't the whole of Genesis that is under discussion. It is Genesis chapter one that is poetry and not history. The rest of the book has to be examined on a passage by passage basis some of it is poetry some prose etcetera.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

It isn't the whole of Genesis that is under discussion. It is Genesis chapter one that is poetry and not history. The rest of the book has to be examined on a passage by passage basis some of it is poetry some prose etcetera.

I think Genesis is both historical and a symbolic representation of God himself. Perhaps you are limiting the truth of Gods word found in Gods holy scriptures. Why would it matter if God created everything in 6 days? Why can we not just agree with scripture?


Luke 19:“ ‘Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord!’[a]
Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”
39 And some of the Pharisees called to Him from the crowd, “Teacher, rebuke Your disciples.”

40 But He answered and said to them, “I tell you that if these should keep silent, the stones would immediately cry out.”




Psalm 19 New King James Version (NKJV)

The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament shows His handiwork.
2 Day unto day utters speech,
And night unto night reveals knowledge.
3 There is no speech nor language
Where their voice is not heard.
4 Their line[a] has gone out through all the earth,
And their words to the end of the world.
In them He has set a tabernacle for the sun,
5 Which is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber,
And rejoices like a strong man to run its race.
6 Its rising is from one end of heaven,
And its circuit to the other end;
And there is nothing hidden from its heat.
7 The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul;
The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple;
8 The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart;
The commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes;
9 The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever;
The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
Yea, than much fine gold;
Sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
11 Moreover by them Your servant is warned,
And in keeping them there is great reward.
12 Who can understand his errors?
Cleanse me from secret faults.
13 Keep back Your servant also from presumptuous sins;
Let them not have dominion over me.
Then I shall be blameless,
And I shall be innocent of great transgression.
14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
Be acceptable in Your sight,
O Lord, my strength and my Redeemer.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

It seems curious that men would not acknowledge God even though man is without excuse in doing so, because all creation declares Gods glory. Why then would we now wish to come in agreement with men who do not acknowledge Gods existence? What do they know? They cant even acknowledge God the creator.

 

[elliott95]

You tell us. How do you interpret one as literal and the other as "wooden"? What's your standard?

This is at the heart of it. Or rather, your question pierces right to the heart.

We all know that the higher criticism that questions the historicity of the Genesis account, carries on through Exodus and right on up to the Resurrection.

There has to be some mental gymnastics involved for us at some point to reject the historicity of the Genesis account, and not end up in the same place as Marcus Borg and Bishop Spong, and John Dominic Crossan.

I personally don't have an answer as to how I can pick and choose to accept the historicity of the empty tomb, and reject the historicity of so much of the Biblical account in general, but it is the elephant in the room that we all ignore.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

It isn't the whole of Genesis that is under discussion. It is Genesis chapter one that is poetry and not history. The rest of the book has to be examined on a passage by passage basis some of it is poetry some prose etcetera.

I said it was types and that's really what it is ... in some cases anological poetry that are similar but unlike ... but all are alike because of being types.
One type in Gen chap 1-2 can be seen fulfilled in Rev chap 21-22.
The New Jerusalem is the type ....
of the matured seed seen in Gen of the creation of the heavens and earth, then seen in Rev as the new heavens and new earth.

Analogy Poetry Type

An Analogy is a likeness or similarity between things (a subject and an analog) that are otherwise unlike. Analogy is the comparison of two pairs which have the same relationship.

The seed of the woman becoming the seed of David, in turn becoming the branch, that gives life to many as the tree of life, may be seen as anologically poetic.

ETA that just makes the bible all that much more reliable .... (just in case some people can't see that)


.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I think Genesis is both historical and a symbolic representation of God himself. Perhaps you are limiting the truth of Gods word found in Gods holy scriptures. Why would it matter if God created everything in 6 days? Why can we not just agree with scripture? ...

You can do as you please as far as a six day creation goes. There's nothing prescriptive about saying that Genesis chapter one is poetry. It just is. The rest comes from interpretation. If your position is to read it as six twenty-four hour days of creation that's consistent with the poem. If your position is to take the days and their order in the poem as literal that's up to you. I do not take them in that way and the long standing tradition of the church is not to do so.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

You can do as you please as far as a six day creation goes. There's nothing prescriptive about saying that Genesis chapter one is poetry. It just is. The rest comes from interpretation. If your position is to read it as six twenty-four hour days of creation that's consistent with the poem. If your position is to take the days and their order in the poem as literal that's up to you. I do not take them in that way and the long standing tradition of the church is not to do so.

I'll bet Peter believed the way i do.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

I second this. At one of my previous churches, there was a girl who was interested in Christianity and going through the information class. When we got to the point where the pastor insisted in literalist creationism (this girl was a biology major), we never saw her again. All for something that has nothing to do with the Gospel. It is shameful how many people are driven away because they think Christianity makes them check their brain at the door.

The LCMS teaches, believes, and confesses a literal 6 day creation. We don't change to make people happy.

OF CREATION
We teach that God has created heaven and earth, and that in the manner and in the space of time recorded in the Holy Scriptures, especially Gen. 1 and 2, namely, by His almighty creative word, and in six days. We reject every doctrine which denies or limits the work of creation as taught in Scripture. In our days it is denied or limited by those who assert, ostensibly in deference to science, that the world came into existence through a process of evolution; that is, that it has, in immense periods of time, developed more or less of itself. Since no man was present when it pleased God to create the world, we must look for a reliable account of creation to God's own record, found in God's own book, the Bible. We accept God's own record with full confidence and confess with Luther's Catechism: "I believe that God has made me and all creatures."

If you have a problem with that and find it shameful, your problem is with the church you attend. It doesn't change and warp its beliefs to the people around it. Fantastic news though. I'm told the ELCA accept virtually any belief; after all, they do have a church in good standing that worships a female deity, and they defy scripture on a number of things.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I'll bet Peter believed the way i do.

I am fairly sure that he did not. One need only read his letters to realise that, and if the gospel of saint Mark is, as tradition suggests, the memoir of saint Peter then reading it will convince almost everybody that saint Peter read the old covenant scriptures as messages about Jesus Christ and not as some kind of history written as a history (such as the books of Chronicles, for example).

 

[Sword of the Lord]

I am fairly sure that he did not.

I bet he did believe in a 6 day creation, but none of us will really know in this life. I'll make you a bet: (IF we both get to heaven) I'll bet you some manna. If he believed as I do, you give me some; if he believed as you do, I'll give you some. Deal?

 

[Restoresmysoul]

I am fairly sure that he did not. One need only read his letters to realise that, and if the gospel of saint Mark is, as tradition suggests, the memoir of saint Peter then reading it will convince almost everybody that saint Peter read the old covenant scriptures as messages about Jesus Christ and not as some kind of history written as a history (such as the books of Chronicles, for example).

I think Peter saw it both ways. Adam and Eve were real, so why not creation in 6 days?

 

[MoreCoffee]

I think Peter saw it both ways. Adam and Eve were real, so why not creation in 6 days?

I can't recall anybody in this thread saying that Adam and Eve were not real people. The story of their creation and their fall are important sources in Christian theology. Nevertheless the way one interprets that story is not simply a matter of reading the text as if it were a prose history. Saint Paul does not read it that way in the passages where he mentions it. The story is read as a basis for theology and for explaining human nature as it is in saint Paul's time and in reading it that way saint Paul is following the example of our Lord Jesus Christ. The stories in Genesis were, according to the new covenant writers, written specifically for the benefit of Christians rather than being a history written as time and events required they are constantly presented as stories teaching Christian doctrine and especially as stories telling Christians about Jesus Christ the messiah and the Lord of glory. Clearly this is not what a history book is like. It is exceptional, it is prophetic, it is filled with types and shadows of the good things that were to come and that did come when Jesus Christ - God incarnate - entered the world.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

I can't recall anybody in this thread saying that Adam and Eve were not real people. The story of their creation and their fall are important sources in Christian theology. Nevertheless the way one interprets that story is not simply a matter of reading the text as if it were a prose history. Saint Paul does not read it that way in the passages where he mentions it. The story is read as a basis for theology and for explaining human nature as it is in saint Paul's time and in reading it that way saint Paul is following the example of our Lord Jesus Christ. The stories in Genesis were, according to the new covenant writers, written specifically for the benefit of Christians rather than being a history written as time and events required they are constantly presented as stories teaching Christian doctrine and especially as stories telling Christians about Jesus Christ the messiah and the Lord of glory. Clearly this is not what a history book is like. It is exceptional, it is prophetic, it is filled with types and shadows of the good things that were to come and that did come when Jesus Christ - God incarnate - entered the world.

Here Paul is teaching two different things with the same scripture. God often uses things in this world to speak of things in the unseen world. Both are true.


Ephesians 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”[e] 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.