To set times and seasons . When the End of time comes will it take billions of years for the heavenly lights to burn out ? No , all physical existence will cease and we return to supernatural eternal existence in the twinkle of an eye ..
Upvote
0
Creationists False on Key Point
- Thread starter Dale
- Start date
To set times and seasons . When the End of time comes will it take billions of years for the heavenly lights to burn out ? No , all physical existence will cease and we return to supernatural eternal existence in the twinkle of an eye ..
- Apr 14, 2003
- 7,183
- 1,229
- 71
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
You seem to be saying that there is no problem with a literal reading of the first few chapter of Genesis.
In the next few posts I will look at some reasons to think otherwise.
1 The man brought me back to the entrance to the temple, and I saw water coming out from under the threshold of the temple toward the east (for the temple faced east). The water was coming down from under the south side of the temple, south of the altar. 2 He then brought me out through the north gate and led me around the outside to the outer gate facing east, and the water was trickling from the south side.
3 As the man went eastward with a measuring line in his hand, he measured off a thousand cubits and then led me through water that was ankle-deep. 4 He measured off another thousand cubits and led me through water that was knee-deep. He measured off another thousand and led me through water that was up to the waist. 5 He measured off another thousand, but now it was a river that I could not cross, because the water had risen and was deep enough to swim in—a river that no one could cross. 6 He asked me, “Son of man, do you see this?”
Then he led me back to the bank of the river.
Ezekiel 47:1-6 NIV
The “man” who shows Ezekiel is an angel, an angelic guide. This section of Ezekiel contains a River of Life and it is obviously symbolic. As the River of Life runs, it gets deeper. In the same way the spiritual life, life with God, gets deeper the farther you go. The statement in verse six, “Son of man, do you see this?” is intended to make sure that we look carefully at what is being said here.
They feast on the abundance of your house; you give them drink from your river of delights.
Psalms 36:8 NIV
4There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God,
the holy place where the Most High dwells.
Psalms 46:4 NIV
The Psalms tells us that God has a “river of delights” and also that there is a special river in “the city of God.” Perhaps this anticipates the River of Life in Revelation.
Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations.
Revelation 22:1-2 NIV
This is the last chapter of the Bible, so the Bible ends with the River of Life “flowing from the throne of God.”
There is also a river in Eden, in Genesis 2.
10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Genesis 2: 10-12 NIV
The River of Life in Ezekiel obviously has symbolic elements. The River of Life in Revelation appears to have special meaning as well. Why would anyone doubt that the River of Life in Genesis is also symbolic? That it has meaning besides watering the ground?
Upvote
0
- Apr 14, 2003
- 7,183
- 1,229
- 71
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Continuing ...
14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,
“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
Genesis 3:14-15 NIV
Some scholars see Genesis 3:15 as foretelling the coming Messiah. If so, it must be the first Messianic prophecy in the Bible. The seed or offspring of Eve will crush the head of the serpent. There is more to this passage than meets the eye. The snake, or serpent, is more than an animal found in the desert, the meadow, or the countryside. The passage is more than a prediction that poisonous and constricting snakes will be a danger and a nuisance. It is also a prediction that evil can be overcome, and will be overcome.
14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,
“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
Genesis 3:14-15 NIV
Some scholars see Genesis 3:15 as foretelling the coming Messiah. If so, it must be the first Messianic prophecy in the Bible. The seed or offspring of Eve will crush the head of the serpent. There is more to this passage than meets the eye. The snake, or serpent, is more than an animal found in the desert, the meadow, or the countryside. The passage is more than a prediction that poisonous and constricting snakes will be a danger and a nuisance. It is also a prediction that evil can be overcome, and will be overcome.
Upvote
0
- Apr 14, 2003
- 7,183
- 1,229
- 71
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Continuing ...
Take a look at the six days of creation in the first chapter of Genesis.
Why did God create light on the first day and then wait until the fourth day to create the sun, moon and stars? I'm not sure I can settle this question, but I'll make a suggestion. What if the “light” created on the first day means consciousness? What if “light” doesn't mean physical light?
To say that God begins the creation of the world by creating consciousness could be a way of emphasizing that God is a conscious being. There are Gnostic sects still around today who think of God as an impersonal storehouse of knowledge, or repository of truth. “God,” then, would refer to the heavenly location of truth but not to a God who cares about His people or his creation. One possible objection is that God follows this up by separating day from night. However, this could be the result of how the chapter is organized, it divides the creation into six parts.
If God creating “light” means God creating consciousness, there is one other possibility. If “light” means consciousness, this could be where God creates angels. God creates conscious spiritual entities, angels, the first conscious beings besides God. Then day and night would mean that angels rest just as mortals do.
If either of these possibilities is acceptable, it helps explain why the sun, moon and stars aren't created until the fourth day. It would mean that God was aware at the beginning, the first day, or that He created angels at that time. Physical light visible to mortals wouldn't exist until the sun, moon and stars are created on the fourth day.
This does seem to solve one problem with the creation narrative. I have talked to Creationists who were quite bothered by it. It would also mean that “Let there be light” in Genesis 1:3 doesn't mean what Creationists have taken it to mean.
Take a look at the six days of creation in the first chapter of Genesis.
Why did God create light on the first day and then wait until the fourth day to create the sun, moon and stars? I'm not sure I can settle this question, but I'll make a suggestion. What if the “light” created on the first day means consciousness? What if “light” doesn't mean physical light?
To say that God begins the creation of the world by creating consciousness could be a way of emphasizing that God is a conscious being. There are Gnostic sects still around today who think of God as an impersonal storehouse of knowledge, or repository of truth. “God,” then, would refer to the heavenly location of truth but not to a God who cares about His people or his creation. One possible objection is that God follows this up by separating day from night. However, this could be the result of how the chapter is organized, it divides the creation into six parts.
If God creating “light” means God creating consciousness, there is one other possibility. If “light” means consciousness, this could be where God creates angels. God creates conscious spiritual entities, angels, the first conscious beings besides God. Then day and night would mean that angels rest just as mortals do.
If either of these possibilities is acceptable, it helps explain why the sun, moon and stars aren't created until the fourth day. It would mean that God was aware at the beginning, the first day, or that He created angels at that time. Physical light visible to mortals wouldn't exist until the sun, moon and stars are created on the fourth day.
This does seem to solve one problem with the creation narrative. I have talked to Creationists who were quite bothered by it. It would also mean that “Let there be light” in Genesis 1:3 doesn't mean what Creationists have taken it to mean.
Upvote
0
- Apr 14, 2003
- 7,183
- 1,229
- 71
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Continuing ...
Creationists say that a literal reading of the first part of Genesis is all that is necessary because it already makes sense. “Newspaper exegesis” is the simplest theory.
Did “newspaper exegesis” make sense to Israelites at the time Genesis was composed? Not entirely. Symbolic speech was familiar.
For example, take the central myth of Babylonian paganism. The chief god, Marduk, defeats the dragon Tiamat. It is widely believed and understood that Tiamat stands for chaos. To the Babylonians, the chief god Marduk, established order by defeating chaos in the form of Tiamat.
It simply isn't true to say that the ancient Israelites expected religious stories to follow “newspaper exegesis.” They were familiar with stories with obvious symbolism.
Creationists say that a literal reading of the first part of Genesis is all that is necessary because it already makes sense. “Newspaper exegesis” is the simplest theory.
Did “newspaper exegesis” make sense to Israelites at the time Genesis was composed? Not entirely. Symbolic speech was familiar.
For example, take the central myth of Babylonian paganism. The chief god, Marduk, defeats the dragon Tiamat. It is widely believed and understood that Tiamat stands for chaos. To the Babylonians, the chief god Marduk, established order by defeating chaos in the form of Tiamat.
It simply isn't true to say that the ancient Israelites expected religious stories to follow “newspaper exegesis.” They were familiar with stories with obvious symbolism.
Upvote
0
- Jul 30, 2004
- 4,620
- 982
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
This is a real Temple and real river showed to Ezekiel. "He asked ME, son of man" That's a phrase not only used for our Lord but to his prophets as well. It's right there, "ME"
Follow the chapter and it continues to describe where this river followed, to Arabah*.
"The Arabah in its whole extent occupies a portion of the great geological fault or crevasse in the earth's crust which extends from Antioch near the mouth of the Orontes southward between the Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon Mountains to the valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea, and onward to the Gulf of Akabah, whence it can be traced with considerable probability through the Red Sea and the interior lakes of Africa."
The Jordan river flows through the Sea of Galilee, the further on into the Dead Sea then continues on.
Symbolism is used in the Bible, never said it wasn't. It's usually explained in scripture. The Creation, the first six days is what I focused on, that's not symbolic. You can point to much symbolism in the Bible -- so what, it doesn't discount literal meaning.
The golden rule of interpretation of the Bible:
"WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE OF SCRIPTURE MAKES COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE; THEREFORE, TAKE EVERY WORD AT ITS PRIMARY, ORDINARY, USUAL, LITERAL MEANING UNLESS THE FACTS OF THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, STUDIED IN THE LIGHT OF RELATED PASSAGES AND AXIOMATIC AND FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS INDICATE CLEARLY OTHERWISE."
Future literal river in the "New " which is another term for Heaven, God's domain, Paradise
Correct four rivers ran out of Eden ... so? Only two of them exist now .... so?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Archie the Preacher
Apostle to the Intellectual Skeptics
- Apr 11, 2003
- 3,171
- 1,011
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Celibate
- Politics
- US-Republican
That doesn't work, 4x4. The 'Light' already in place was suitable for anything the Sun does, showing evening and morning and such. So there was no need to put in anything else to 'set times and seasons'. The rest of your post is irrelevant.
Upvote
0
Archie the Preacher
Apostle to the Intellectual Skeptics
- Apr 11, 2003
- 3,171
- 1,011
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Celibate
- Politics
- US-Republican
It should also be noted all the Jewish scholars reading this passage in Hebrew read it with the understanding of 'something from nothing'. I noted in my recent reading of Lawrence M. Krauss' book Something from Nothing, he claims the Universe was preceded by something else, as no thing can come from nothing. So you're agreeing with the atheist faction determined to explain away God.
Any particular reason to edit your non-citation of what you claim? By the way, from where DID you get that rather limited definition of 'bara'?
Strong's Concordance
בָּרָא
Transliteration - bara'
Pronunciation - bä·rä'
create (42x), creator (3x), choose (2x), make (2x), cut down (2x), dispatch (1x), done (1x), make fat (1x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]
- to create, shape, form
- (Qal) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)
- of heaven and earth
- of individual man
- of new conditions and circumstances
- of transformations
- (Niphal) to be created
- of heaven and earth
- of birth
- of something new
- of miracles
- (Piel)
- to cut down
- to cut out
- (Qal) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)
- to be fat
- (Hiphil) to make yourselves fat
Upvote
0
- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,279
- 8,500
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Do you read what you have memorized? The "narrow gate"
in RIGHT DOWN there in the sig file.
I protest. Teams of everyday, average, translators have come up with your version in their words.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Yeshua said to him, “I AM THE LIVING GOD, The Way and The Truth and The Life;
no man comes to my Father but by me alone.”
King James 2000 Bible
Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes unto the Father, but by me.
Young's Literal Translation
Jesus saith to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life, no one doth come unto the Father, if not through me;
‹ὁ›
Ἰησοῦς
Ἐγώ
εἰμι
ἡ
ὁδὸς
καὶ
ἡ
ἀλήθεια
καὶ
ἡ
ζωή·
οὐδεὶς
ἔρχεται
πρὸς
τὸν
Πατέρα
εἰ
μὴ
δι’
ἐμοῦ.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Genesis 1:1-5 1rst day then Genesis 1:14-18 4th day .. My post may or may not be relevant but God's Word is . Don't you agree ?
Upvote
0
- Jul 30, 2004
- 4,620
- 982
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
I wrote a book on Christianity and used 570 verses of the most powerful scriptures in the Bible. I used eight, depending on the scripture. [KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB, NIV, YLT, WNT, WEB]
I paraphrase when I want to express a point quickly off the cuff but if I have more time, I'll go word for word in whichever book I have near me. Ruth Graham said, "I have 20 versions of the Bible and they all say the same thing". But of course when we want to get a richer meaning we examine several and we look up the Greek as well! But don't try to impress me with that, hundreds of the finest scholars have already done the work for us in so many versions.
I don't really get your point, "Do I read what I memorize"? How can I not? But maybe this is what you mean, the "narrow gate" is Jesus. He said I am the "doorway", or haven't you read that?
Upvote
0
I've seen where shepherds actually had a safe enclosure/pen for his sheep with one entrance , the shepherd acted as the gate himself in the way . Nothing come in or out except by him ..
Upvote
0
Light is information (truth) as I believe the universe is created by information (word of God) and not matter and energy. Matter and energy in the vehicle that information rides on. Sun doesn't really give off "light" as we know it but electromagnetic waves. Electromagnetic waves bounces off object and hit our retina. The retina sends a digital code to our visual cortex. Our visual cortex creates the imagines we "see". Notice how much of this process is informational. The sun is that which reveals the world to us but that's not the ultimate source of light. The events in Genesis is mirrored in Revelation where once again the sun will not be the source of "light" as it was in the beginning.
If someone doesn't believe in the creation in Genesis then why should they believe in the new creation in Revelation?
Light before the sun and moon goes against the principle of continuity; the religious belief most scientific theories are built upon.
In scriptures life, death, light and darkness have a much deeper meaning than that of the materialistic worldview.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Apr 14, 2003
- 7,183
- 1,229
- 71
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Dale said: ↑
Ezekiel 47:1-6 NIV
This is a real Temple and real river showed to Ezekiel. "He asked ME, son of man" That's a phrase not only used for our Lord but to his prophets as well. It's right there, "ME"
Follow the chapter and it continues to describe where this river followed, to Arabah*.
"The Arabah in its whole extent occupies a portion of the great geological fault or crevasse in the earth's crust which extends from Antioch near the mouth of the Orontes southward between the Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon Mountains to the valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea, and onward to the Gulf of Akabah, whence it can be traced with considerable probability through the Red Sea and the interior lakes of Africa."
The Jordan river flows through the Sea of Galilee, the further on into the Dead Sea then continues on.
Dale said: ↑
Psalms 36:8 NIV
Dale said: ↑
Psalms 46:4 NIV
Dale said: ↑
The Psalms tells us that God has a “river of delights” and also that there is a special river in “the city of God.” Perhaps this anticipates the River of Life in Revelation.
Symbolism is used in the Bible, never said it wasn't. It's usually explained in scripture. The Creation, the first six days is what I focused on, that's not symbolic. You can point to much symbolism in the Bible -- so what, it doesn't discount literal meaning.
The golden rule of interpretation of the Bible:
"WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE OF SCRIPTURE MAKES COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE; THEREFORE, TAKE EVERY WORD AT ITS PRIMARY, ORDINARY, USUAL, LITERAL MEANING UNLESS THE FACTS OF THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, STUDIED IN THE LIGHT OF RELATED PASSAGES AND AXIOMATIC AND FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS INDICATE CLEARLY OTHERWISE."
Dale said: ↑
Revelation 22:1-2 NIV
Future literal river in the "New " which is another term for Heaven, God's domain, Paradise
Dale said: ↑
There is also a river in Eden, in Genesis 2.
10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Genesis 2: 10-12 NIV
Click to expand...
Correct four rivers ran out of Eden ... so? Only two of them exist now .... so?
Ronald, you say that Ezekiel's River of Life is just “a real river.” You go on to say that symbolism in the Bible is explained in the Bible. I haven't found that to be true. What I have found is that Creationists oversimplify everything.
The great commentators have a different view. Take the Matthew Henry commentary quoted below. Henry sees “mystical and spiritual meaning” in the part of Ezekiel where you see a river that waters the land. He sees symbolism which isn't spelled out in the text itself.
Link:
http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/ezekiel/47.html
Matthew Henry commentary on Ezekiel 47
Chapter 47
In this chapter we have, I. The vision of the holy waters, their rise, extent, depth, and healing virtue, the plenty of fish in them, and an account of the trees growing on the banks of them (v. 1-12). II. An appointment of the borders of the land of Canaan, which was to be divided by lot to the tribes of Israel and the strangers that sojourned among them (v. 13-23).
Verses 1-12 This part of Ezekiel’s vision must so necessarily have a mystical and spiritual meaning that thence we conclude the other parts of his vision have a mystical and spiritual meaning also; for it cannot be applied to the waters brought by pipes into the temple for the washing of the sacrifices, the keeping of the temple clean, and the carrying off of those waters, for that would be to turn this pleasant river into a sink or common sewer. That prophecy, Zec. 14:8 , may explain it, of living waters that shall go out from Jerusalem, half of them towards the former sea and half of them towards the hinder sea. And there is plainly a reference to this in St. John’s vision of a pure river of water of life, Rev. 22:1 . That seems to represent the glory and joy which are grace perfected. This seems to represent the grace and joy which are glory begun. Most interpreters agree that these waters signify the gospel of Christ, which went forth from Jerusalem, and spread itself into the countries about, and the gifts and powers of the Holy Ghost which accompanied it, and by virtue of which it spread far and produced strange and blessed effects. Ezekiel had walked round the house again and again, and yet did not till now take notice of those waters; for God makes known his mind and will to his people, not all at once, but by degrees. Now observe,I. The rise of these waters. He is not put to trace the streams to the fountain, but has the fountain-head first discovered to him (v. 1): Waters issued out from the threshold of the house eastward, and from under the right side of the house, that is, the south side of the alter. And again (v. 2), There ran out waters on the right side, signifying that from Zion should go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, Isa. 2:3 . There it was that the Spirit was poured out upon the apostles, and endued them with the gift of tongues, that they might carry these waters to all nations. In the temple first they were to stand and preach the words of this life, Acts. 5:20 . They must preach the gospel to all nations, but must begin at Jerusalem, Lu. 24:47 . But that is not all: Christ is the temple; he is the door; from him those living waters flow, out of his pierced side. It is the water that he gives us that is the well of water which springs up, Jn. 4:14 . And it is by believing in him that we receive from him rivers of living water; and this spoke he of the Spirit, Jn. 7:38, Jn. 7:39 . The original of these waters was not above-ground, but they sprang up from under the threshold; for the fountain of a believer’s life is a mystery; it is hid with Christ in God, Col. 3:3
Ezekiel 47:1-6 NIV
This is a real Temple and real river showed to Ezekiel. "He asked ME, son of man" That's a phrase not only used for our Lord but to his prophets as well. It's right there, "ME"
Follow the chapter and it continues to describe where this river followed, to Arabah*.
"The Arabah in its whole extent occupies a portion of the great geological fault or crevasse in the earth's crust which extends from Antioch near the mouth of the Orontes southward between the Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon Mountains to the valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea, and onward to the Gulf of Akabah, whence it can be traced with considerable probability through the Red Sea and the interior lakes of Africa."
The Jordan river flows through the Sea of Galilee, the further on into the Dead Sea then continues on.
Dale said: ↑
Psalms 36:8 NIV
Dale said: ↑
Psalms 46:4 NIV
Dale said: ↑
The Psalms tells us that God has a “river of delights” and also that there is a special river in “the city of God.” Perhaps this anticipates the River of Life in Revelation.
Symbolism is used in the Bible, never said it wasn't. It's usually explained in scripture. The Creation, the first six days is what I focused on, that's not symbolic. You can point to much symbolism in the Bible -- so what, it doesn't discount literal meaning.
The golden rule of interpretation of the Bible:
"WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE OF SCRIPTURE MAKES COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE; THEREFORE, TAKE EVERY WORD AT ITS PRIMARY, ORDINARY, USUAL, LITERAL MEANING UNLESS THE FACTS OF THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, STUDIED IN THE LIGHT OF RELATED PASSAGES AND AXIOMATIC AND FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS INDICATE CLEARLY OTHERWISE."
Dale said: ↑
Revelation 22:1-2 NIV
Future literal river in the "New " which is another term for Heaven, God's domain, Paradise
Dale said: ↑
There is also a river in Eden, in Genesis 2.
10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Genesis 2: 10-12 NIV
Click to expand...
Correct four rivers ran out of Eden ... so? Only two of them exist now .... so?
Ronald, you say that Ezekiel's River of Life is just “a real river.” You go on to say that symbolism in the Bible is explained in the Bible. I haven't found that to be true. What I have found is that Creationists oversimplify everything.
The great commentators have a different view. Take the Matthew Henry commentary quoted below. Henry sees “mystical and spiritual meaning” in the part of Ezekiel where you see a river that waters the land. He sees symbolism which isn't spelled out in the text itself.
Link:
http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/ezekiel/47.html
Matthew Henry commentary on Ezekiel 47
Chapter 47
In this chapter we have, I. The vision of the holy waters, their rise, extent, depth, and healing virtue, the plenty of fish in them, and an account of the trees growing on the banks of them (v. 1-12). II. An appointment of the borders of the land of Canaan, which was to be divided by lot to the tribes of Israel and the strangers that sojourned among them (v. 13-23).
Verses 1-12 This part of Ezekiel’s vision must so necessarily have a mystical and spiritual meaning that thence we conclude the other parts of his vision have a mystical and spiritual meaning also; for it cannot be applied to the waters brought by pipes into the temple for the washing of the sacrifices, the keeping of the temple clean, and the carrying off of those waters, for that would be to turn this pleasant river into a sink or common sewer. That prophecy, Zec. 14:8 , may explain it, of living waters that shall go out from Jerusalem, half of them towards the former sea and half of them towards the hinder sea. And there is plainly a reference to this in St. John’s vision of a pure river of water of life, Rev. 22:1 . That seems to represent the glory and joy which are grace perfected. This seems to represent the grace and joy which are glory begun. Most interpreters agree that these waters signify the gospel of Christ, which went forth from Jerusalem, and spread itself into the countries about, and the gifts and powers of the Holy Ghost which accompanied it, and by virtue of which it spread far and produced strange and blessed effects. Ezekiel had walked round the house again and again, and yet did not till now take notice of those waters; for God makes known his mind and will to his people, not all at once, but by degrees. Now observe,I. The rise of these waters. He is not put to trace the streams to the fountain, but has the fountain-head first discovered to him (v. 1): Waters issued out from the threshold of the house eastward, and from under the right side of the house, that is, the south side of the alter. And again (v. 2), There ran out waters on the right side, signifying that from Zion should go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, Isa. 2:3 . There it was that the Spirit was poured out upon the apostles, and endued them with the gift of tongues, that they might carry these waters to all nations. In the temple first they were to stand and preach the words of this life, Acts. 5:20 . They must preach the gospel to all nations, but must begin at Jerusalem, Lu. 24:47 . But that is not all: Christ is the temple; he is the door; from him those living waters flow, out of his pierced side. It is the water that he gives us that is the well of water which springs up, Jn. 4:14 . And it is by believing in him that we receive from him rivers of living water; and this spoke he of the Spirit, Jn. 7:38, Jn. 7:39 . The original of these waters was not above-ground, but they sprang up from under the threshold; for the fountain of a believer’s life is a mystery; it is hid with Christ in God, Col. 3:3
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,024
- 7,364
- 60
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
You got a lot going on in these posts, I'll try to address the OP and see who it goes.
Creationists are not fighting science, that's a gross misnomer. It's not even opposed to evolution as properly defined scientifically, it's defined as the change of alleles (traits) in populations over time. Darwinism is the a priori assumption of universal common descent by exclusively naturalistic means. There is a difference and Creationists never deny Mendelian genetics which represents the truly scientific nature of how traits are inherited biologically.
Darwin introduced a very important concept now almost universally accepted:
The probability of all change in the organic, as well as in the inorganic world, being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition. (Darwin On the Origin of Species)
That proposition and probability has grown to be a presupposition. That is the problem.
It ebbs and flows but Christianity has been very involved with academics it's entire and considerable history. Modern scholars should take note.
Finally in 1859 Marx published A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy,[165] his first serious economic work. This work was intended merely as a preview of his three-volume Das Kapital (English title: Capital: Critique of Political Economy) on which he intended to publish at a later date. Wikipedia
On the Origin of Species, published on 24 November 1859, is a work of scientific literature by Charles Darwin which is considered to be the foundation of evolutionary biology. Wikipedia
On the Origin of Species, published on 24 November 1859, is a work of scientific literature by Charles Darwin which is considered to be the foundation of evolutionary biology. Wikipedia
Seems unlikely but The Communist Manifesto was published a couple of years previously. Not really seeing a major point emerging here.
Christianity wasn't weakened by Darwinism, in fact, the conflict over creationism and Darwinian logic has been a profoundly important addition to Christian Apologetics. I really don't see the problem you are wrestling with but enjoyed the opening post enough to hazard an opinion.
Grace and peace,
Mark
Upvote
0
Radrook
Well-Known Member
- Feb 25, 2016
- 11,536
- 2,723
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
Rejection of the Genesis account as mere myth strikes at the very heart of Christianity for the following reasons.
1. Jesus himself is described as lending it historical credence
2. Peter. Paul, Jude, Luke, Mathew, John, specifically lend it historical credence
3. It removes the basis for the theme of paradise lost to paradise regained.
4. It removes the need for redemption and a redeemer-the fall of man from original perfection.
5. It strikes at Jesus' authenticity as the Son of God by describing him as gullible and a propagator of mere myth.
These five things alone are extremely serious reasons why Christians are opposed to accepting the anti biblical demonically inspired, propaganda which has become popular during these last days.
1. Jesus himself is described as lending it historical credence
2. Peter. Paul, Jude, Luke, Mathew, John, specifically lend it historical credence
3. It removes the basis for the theme of paradise lost to paradise regained.
4. It removes the need for redemption and a redeemer-the fall of man from original perfection.
5. It strikes at Jesus' authenticity as the Son of God by describing him as gullible and a propagator of mere myth.
These five things alone are extremely serious reasons why Christians are opposed to accepting the anti biblical demonically inspired, propaganda which has become popular during these last days.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,024
- 7,364
- 60
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Well don't hold back, tell us what you really think brother. But seriously, I appreciate the thoughness and thoughtfulness of your points. It is refreshing and encouraging to see such strong conviction expressed in such well established terms. I've always liked the anecdote of the conversation with CS Lewis and JRR Token where he commented that Scripture is myth, quickly adding that it was true myth. I think what he was getting at that it has the elements of myth and yet it actually happened.
I have long held that creation is a New Testament doctrine with principles that transcend the totality of Scripture literally from the first chapter of Genesis the the last fulfillment predicted in the Revelation.
On the other hand I have to say that the evidential approach to apologetics I have pursued has yielded some fascinating insights into natural science and philosophy.
Grace and peace,
Mark
Upvote
0
Similar threads
