Voting in favor of your Bible POV - God's Word

K2K said:

Thank you for the information - So then how long was the day mentioned in Genesis? When did the planets, stars, stuff come into existence to even have days measured like that? That is what people argue about. Was it a literal 24 hour day? And have the rate of rotation of planets gotten slower so that it is now not the same speed as in used to be? Before the moon, a day on earth wasn't only about 6 hours was it?

The point is that thinking God's time for a day in Genesis has anything to do with the earth spinning does make much sense at all. If a day is like a thousand years to Him and a thousand years to Him and the Bible (Ps 78) clearly says He speaks to us in parables and dark saying, then that is all just symbolic, but people make it about it having to be seven 24 hour periods when even the time it takes for the earth to rotate is changing and can change. What about that day that got longer when David asked the Lord for it?

Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools

Are you sure about that time for a day on Venus? At what point in time was that measurement taken, and how long is an hour on Venus? In fact, on earth, is the time of an hour changing?

It is all silliness. God is not restricted by your thinking and not even your thinking about time.

One of the things you get to know quickly if you actually start hearing from Him is that God is spirit. Because He is spirit, He tend to think in spiritual terms. So days, hours, minutes are not for Him like they are for us. You see this all through the Bible. He tells Daniel how long it is going to take but when the Lord took on flesh nobody knew the time. And when He does His next thing is anyone going to know the time then? Maybe if they were listening the angels in heaven might proclaim it, maybe not.

But professing to be wise we proclaim our understanding. We do that. So we vote for the Bible instead of Him then proclaim the Bible mean a literal sense when even our "vote for" was not literal! So we say, 'I know how long a day is' but do we?

So I am staying with 2,802 hours for a day on Venus. Who are you to say it isn't? Just because we divide up the rotation on earth into 24 periods we call hours doesn't mean that the rotation on Venus can be divided into 2802 period which are call hours on Venus. We will just have to talk to the Venusians once we have found them. That is the silliness of this whole thread!

Or perhaps we should talk to God if we find Him?

Ps 2:1 Why are the nations in an uproar and the peoples devising a vain thing?

Ps 2:3 He who sits in the heavens laughs, The Lord scoffs at them.

Click to expand...

It was a day on earth, like any other day on earth..

I have no reason to see it differently. God never distinguishes that it was any different.. He states what He states about each day, with no differentiation.

It comes down to:

Do you think God could not have done it in a literal six days of 24 hours each?

If you think it was not within His power... you have a problem... not with man.. but with God.

If you think it was within God's power.. and He said that He did it in six days.. then... why the doubt?

We already had one answer for that.... "Scientists laugh at us who believe that it was six literal days"

Yep.... men.... mere mortal, created, beings with finite knowledge and intellect... say God is wrong...

I'll go with what God said... simply because:

It is well within His power to do it... and... He said that He did.

JacksBratt said:

However... I really don't see that it has the same support for argument as the literal six days of creation.

Click to expand...

The fact our Lord stood by His words when many of His followers were leaving because of them, and the fact that He was apparently willing to let the 12 leave as well without explaining what He "really meant" if they'd misunderstood Him. This wasn't on a par with Him using an obvious metaphor like "I am the Gate", which everyone appears to have understood as a metaphor and took no offense at.

66As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

This one drove away those for whom it was too "hard" a saying. It still does, doesn't?

My point is still that y'all are majoring in the minors. Believing in a 7 day Creation isn't in the Creeds, and as far as I know no one considers it to be of any ultimate importance. It's a bard's device for oral storytelling. In general the story is true. In detail - what detail? "God said...", and in the eyes of the storyteller, 'nuff said. He didn't know how, and no one ever will in this life. It's a God thing, and way above our paygrade. But our Lord's Words are the Words of God Himself, walking amongst us. To trivialize them and wave them off as a mere metaphor ignores the effect they had on those who heard them, and the fact that our Lord never made any effort to modify them to prevent losing followers.

This is really a case of tossing out the cornflakes and eating the box. Playing as though the purely background part of the story Creation is of ultimate importance, while the stern and difficult words of the Creator Himself and merely figures of speech. It appears to me to be based on a slavish devotion to a dearly held doctrine, or a basic worldly skepticism that says, "No, He can't really have meant that.

JacksBratt said:

It is well within His power to do it... and... He said that He did.

Click to expand...

But wait..."
60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?”". Was that not well within His power? And isn't that what He said? Hmmmmm..

BobRyan said:

(I don't see Luther in that quote above trying to link the Eucharist to Genesis 1)

Click to expand...

The point is still that your doctrine demands that Genesis must be literally true and the words of our Lord concerning the Communion must not be literally true.

That's not a Biblical issue, it's a doctrinal issue.

What is the fascination with trying to link the Lord's Supper with the Genesis account?

Click to expand...

Pointing out a bit doctrinal based exegetical slight of hand is a lot of it, and giving fair recognition to a heroic example of gnat-straining camel swallowing is another.

Why not link it with the Gospel statement of Christ in John 10 "I am the door"? John 10:7

Click to expand...

How many of the disciples left our Lord because of that metaphor? How may protested that it was a hard saying,or asked how anyone could hear it? C'mon, you're gonna have to beat that even for you to believe it.

What some seem to not be getting is that the point being raised by bringing up Jesus' words about the Supper is that those who are arguing that one MUST believe a literal six day creation are also those who argue that Jesus CAN'T literally mean it when He says the bread and wine are His body and blood.

To not accept Genesis 1 literally is to be accused of "not believing the Bible" to "call God a liar" and all other manner of slanderous things.

And yet, out of the same mouth is said that God cannot mean it when He says bread is His true flesh and wine His true blood.

The accusation against those who don't take Genesis 1 literally is that we don't take it literally because we are being influenced by modern science, philosophy, vain human reason, etc.

And out of the same mouth the arguments against the Supper being Christ's flesh and blood is that bread can't be flesh, that Jesus can't be present in the bread and wine if He is in His flesh with His disciples, or that He can't be both in heaven and also in His Supper at the same time, or that the infinite cannot fill the finie, and all manner of arguments based upon philosophy, human reason, and the like.

As long as the double standard and hypocrisy in these debates remain, you can expect that this hypocrisy is going to be called out.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

What some seem to not be getting is that the point being raised by bringing up Jesus' words about the Supper is that those who are arguing that one MUST believe a literal six day creation are also those who argue that Jesus CAN'T literally mean it when He says the bread and wine are His body and blood.

To not accept Genesis 1 literally is to be accused of "not believing the Bible" to "call God a liar" and all other manner of slanderous things.

And yet, out of the same mouth is said that God cannot mean it when He says bread is His true flesh and wine His true blood.

The accusation against those who don't take Genesis 1 literally is that we don't take it literally because we are being influenced by modern science, philosophy, vain human reason, etc.

And out of the same mouth the arguments against the Supper being Christ's flesh and blood is that bread can't be flesh, that Jesus can't be present in the bread and wine if He is in His flesh with His disciples, or that He can't be both in heaven and also in His Supper at the same time, or that the infinite cannot fill the finie, and all manner of arguments based upon philosophy, human reason, and the like.

As long as the double standard and hypocrisy in these debates remain, you can expect that this hypocrisy is going to be called out.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

The unspoken assertion behind your argument is that Jesus never spoke figuratively of Himself therefore He had to be speaking literally of His body and blood at the last supper. As that is a very demonstrably false assertion I see no reason to accept the parameters you attempt to place on me in any answer I give you.

Jesus often spoke figuratively (spiritually) of Himself. In fact, in John 6:25-64 Jesus Himself refutes your entire assertion. He speaks there of His body and blood needing to be eaten for us to have eternal life, but then He goes on to say it is His words, i.e. His teachings, that are spirit and life and when we believe Him we have eternal life. He is plainly showing that eating His flesh and drinking His blood is figurative language. He is referencing his allusions to what He said in John 6 when he uses the same allusion to eating His body and drinking during the last supper.

Click to expand...

There is your Biblical answer. Do you not like it? Why not respond to it? Your post above completely misrepresents my answer.

OldWiseGuy said:

5. The bible account is true but we don't understand it fully.

Click to expand...

I agree...mostly, I do think the earth is older than the 6K years. If that requires the gap theory to explain it, then I don't have a problem with it.

Speaking for myself, I take God's word as the only truth. Science doesn't really put the flags up for me, If our parents, elected officials, clergy, spouse, and children lie to us, then you have to assume that some scientists will stoop low enough to lie us.

This probably will not be received well, but if you look at who is supporting, and pushing the science agenda, these are but a few:

- Bernie Sanders
- AOC
- Omar
- Talib
- Hilary
- Pelosi

And the list goes on. Everyone of these people are certifiable, they live outside of reality, and they and others support all the "theories" science vomits out without question.

They, and others like them, push me further away from secular views in general, and back to fellowship, payer, and God's Word.

Just my view

JacksBratt said:

It was a day on earth, like any other day on earth..

I have no reason to see it differently. God never distinguishes that it was any different.. He states what He states about each day, with no differentiation.

It comes down to:

Do you think God could not have done it in a literal six days of 24 hours each?

If you think it was not within His power... you have a problem... not with man.. but with God.

If you think it was within God's power.. and He said that He did it in six days.. then... why the doubt?

We already had one answer for that.... "Scientists laugh at us who believe that it was six literal days"

Yep.... men.... mere mortal, created, beings with finite knowledge and intellect... say God is wrong...

I'll go with what God said... simply because:

It is well within His power to do it... and... He said that He did.

Click to expand...

Concerning if I think God could have done it in a literal six days or 24 hours: I actually think I did it in much less time than that. Why take so long? I personally think there is something to the Big Bang theory, where in a single moment the universe same into existence.

Never-the-less - you didn't get created, grow, learn, exist, and go out of existence is a single moment, it takes what we call time. Yet is your concept of time God's concept of time? The Scriptures, if we really want to say we think the Scriptures are correct, explain that His thoughts are not your thoughts! It is written that a day to is like a thousand years to God, and a thousand years is like a day to God. We have read that, right?

So how can someone read the Bible and conclude that in the beginning, even before men existed, that a "day" meant you we think it means? We missed the fact that God thoughts are not our thoughts!!!! We failed to believe the very words in the Scriptures we boldly proclaim we believe.

Now concerning, "Do I have a problem with God"? Absolutely. He is simply weird!!! Anyone who has spent much time talking with the the Lord knows for certain that His thoughts are not their thoughts, and they get some understanding why His thought are not their thoughts. Of course that comes from actually listening to Him and it does not come from leaning on your own understanding, although you would think it might if a person actually believed what was written in the Scriptures.

One thing you learn from actually listening to Him is that He soo extremely intelligent and soo much smarter than you! You simply can not fully understand His thinking!!! So if He tells you something it is right, but it is not right like you think because you are not even capable of thinking at His level. Even the ministering angels sent to minister to you know this. They don't consider understanding the depths of God something to be considered.

The Scriptures also explain that Jesus who was in the beginning with God, the perfect image of God, and who is God (the Son) does not consider that understanding the depths of God something that can be done. So how silly do we look when we take a stance that it had to be seven 24 hour time periods we think of as days. The attitude about us in heaven can only be compared to adults talking about the silliness of little children thinking that they have it all figured out. And even that is a favorable look at us.

If you care to believe it, the Lord spent a few months, a year or so after I got to know Him, and He went over Genesis with me. He is soo much smarter than the theologians, but at the same time He told me not to argue of this topic because I wasn't there and could not understand. That was the conclusion, and is the conclusion I am putting forward. You were not there, and even if the Lord explains it, you can not understand! So then, what you will understand from actually talking to Him is that you can not understand.

Now what I really would like to get at with many of those posting on this Christian Forum concerns "I'll go with what God said... simply because:" which you wrote.

It is not "God said"!!!!!

That is where Christians tend to go wrong!! What God said was correct, but that is not how we are supposed to live our lives!! We must live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God and He said He would never leave us! So we have to live by listening to what He says!

Now pay close attention because it needs to go from "God said" to "God says"!!!!!

The Scriptures were written by people who were hearing from the Lord, and they wrote what they did because they want you too to hear from the Lord yourself!!!!

That is the basic reason I write on this forum. I want people to understand that it is not about what God said, it is about Him saying things to you personally today, so that you hearing directly from Him!! What what God said to others was recorded, but we live by what God says to us today! The record should have made this known to you and what was recorded should even help you understand what He tells you today. It was not recorded so that you would lean on your understanding of what people like Moses, Isaiah, and Paul wrote but that you would seek the Lord for yourself!! So they wrote down thing that they heard from their Lord so that you might come to know Him for yourself!!!

Moses told a stubborn people that the word was near them. Paul went over the same thing with another group of stubborn people explaining the word was near them, in there hearts and on their lips because those people were saying "God said instead of God says" because they were saying in their heart that the Christ was either dead or in a far off place called heaven. So Paul clearly explained that the word we preached was found in their hearts. That is what you read in the Bible. So the Bible is worth reading, because you can find the wisdom that lead you to Jesus Christ, but it doesn't mean you did!

Did you find Jesus Christ? Are you writing "God said" or "God says"?

I have my ideas on how things were created. My thoughts are very simply that God spoke and things happened. I believe that because I see that about Him who I know. Yet seven 24 hour days? That seems ridiculous, after getting to know Him. I personally believe in a Big Bang, a mere moment when He spoke and creation burst forth. Then why not 13 to 15 billions years of Him constantly working with His creation. That time period could seem like a few days to Him.

Basically, theologians have their ideas, scientist have there ideas, and God has His ideas. Both the theologian and the scientist are His idea, but both look to themselves our of pride.

Silverback said:

I agree...mostly, I do think the earth is older than the 6K years. If that requires the gap theory to explain it, then I don't have a problem with it.

Speaking for myself, I take God's word as the only truth. Science doesn't really put the flags up for me, If our parents, elected officials, clergy, spouse, and children lie to us, then you have to assume that some scientists will stoop low enough to lie us.

This probably will not be received well, but if you look at who is supporting, and pushing the science agenda, these are but a few:

- Bernie Sanders
- AOC
- Omar
- Talib
- Hilary
- Pelosi

And the list goes on. Everyone of these people are certifiable, they live outside of reality, and they and others support all the "theories" science vomits out without question.

They, and others like them, push me further away from secular views in general, and back to fellowship, payer, and God's Word.

Just my view

Click to expand...

I am an OEC.

OldWiseGuy said:

I am an OEC.

Click to expand...

Old Earth Creationist?

Silverback said:

Old Earth Creationist?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Gary K said:

There is your Biblical answer. Do you not like it? Why not respond to it? Your post above completely misrepresents my answer.

Click to expand...

Because it's not an answer to the challenge for a biblical reason as to not take Jesus' words about the Supper literally.

If I said that Jesus' resurrection wasn't literal because Jesus speaks figuratively, so when He says that the Son of Man must suffer, die, and be in the earth for three days, then rise from the dead that He's being figurative--would you consider "I am the True Vine" to be an adequate argument against Jesus' literal resurrection from the dead? I certainly wouldn't.

What makes Jesus' statement of "This is My body" anything other than that it is His body? Biblically.

The difference between His figurative words, such as that He is the Vine, that He is the Good Shepherd, that He is the Light, that He is the Door, etc is that He refers to Himself as these things figuratively. But at the Last Supper He doesn't say, "I am the true Bread" or "I am the true Wine", He takes literal bread and says, "This is My body" He takes wine and says "This is My blood". That which He holds He calls His flesh and blood. He does not compare Himself to bread and wine, like He does to a vine, or to a door--but He takes these material things, declares them to be His flesh and blood. That's a fundamentally different way of talking.

So, sure, had Jesus at the Supper declared "I am the true Bread" and "I am the true Wine" then we could say, ah, He is using the elements of the Passover Seder as illustrations of Himself symbolically. But that's not what happens, that's not what He did. And that's why everyone in Christianity readily and easily understood what Jesus was saying, it's the reason why when many of His followers abandoned Him He didn't seek to correct their misunderstanding, because there was no misunderstanding to correct. After they leave Him, He doesn't turn to the rest of His disciples and say, "Here is the true meaning of My words", He says, "Will you also leave Me?" But what do they say, "Lord, where would we go? You have the words of eternal life." He doesn't correct, He doesn't clarify, what He said remains as He said it.

Even those who abandoned Him understood what He meant, not to mention those who remained with Him, and as the Apostles preached Christ throughout the Roma world and beyond, what they proclaimed and confessed was that this Supper is the flesh and blood of Jesus. It's what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11.

This is why St. Ignatius of Antioch, who had been personally taught by the Apostles, and personally chosen by the Apostles to serve as the bishop of Antioch could say, in his letters,

"[The heretics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils." - St. Ignatius of Antioch, to the Church in Smyrna, c. 107 AD

If it seems like Ignatius is speaking harshly when he says that some have incurred death in the midst of their disputes, consider that St. Paul speaks the same words in his first letter to the Church in Corinth,

"Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died." - 1 Corinthians 11:27-30

-CryptoLutheran

K2K said:

Concerning if I think God could have done it in a literal six days or 24 hours: I actually think I did it in much less time than that.

Click to expand...

So, it was possible for Him to do it in the time indicated by the scriptures then?

K2K said:

Why take so long?

Click to expand...

To set a pattern for humans and their lives on earth... a six to one ratio of work vs rest... not sleeping.

K2K said:

I personally think there is something to the Big Bang theory, where in a single moment the universe same into existence.

Click to expand...

Absolutely... But, I also think that the priest who put together the big bang theory.. was too close to the genesis account of all from nothing.. for science. Now, if I am correct, science is balking at the BBT.

K2K said:

Never-the-less - you didn't get created, grow, learn, exist, and go out of existence is a single moment, it takes what we call time. Yet is your concept of time God's concept of time? The Scriptures, if we really want to say we think the Scriptures are correct, explain that His thoughts are not your thoughts! It is written that a day to is like a thousand years to God, and a thousand years is like a day to God. We have read that, right?

Click to expand...

The whole "a day to is like a thousand years to God, and a thousand years is like a day to God."
was not in reference to the creation of the universe.

I believe, from reading scriptures surrounding this quote.. that the context is that there are 7000 years of life or time for mankind... Just like a seven day week..

So, from Adam, to the end of the millennial reign of Christ.. will be seven days or 7 x 1000 years.

In the passage the people are questioning...4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
His answer is that it will be a long time.

It has nothing to do with the literal six days of creation..

K2K said:

So how can someone read the Bible and conclude that in the beginning, even before men existed, that a "day" meant you we think it means?

Click to expand...

Due to the simple fact that He punctuated each day with "there was evening, there was morning the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th day.. then based a work week on this premise.

K2K said:

Now concerning, "Do I have a problem with God"? Absolutely. He is simply weird!!! Anyone who has spent much time talking with the the Lord knows for certain that His thoughts are not their thoughts, and they get some understanding why His thought are not their thoughts. Of course that comes from actually listening to Him and it does not come from leaning on your own understanding, although you would think it might if a person actually believed what was written in the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

I never asked if anyone had a problem with God.

I did ask if you have a problem with God being able to do what is explained in Genesis.. more specifically.. creating the universe in six literal days..

K2K said:

One thing you learn from actually listening to Him is that He soo extremely intelligent and soo much smarter than you! You simply can not fully understand His thinking!!! So if He tells you something it is right, but it is not right like you think because you are not even capable of thinking at His level. Even the ministering angels sent to minister to you know this. They don't consider understanding the depths of God something to be considered.

Click to expand...

Not sure of your point here.

K2K said:

The Scriptures also explain that Jesus who was in the beginning with God, the perfect image of God, and who is God (the Son) does not consider that understanding the depths of God something that can be done. So how silly do we look when we take a stance that it had to be seven 24 hour time periods we think of as days. The attitude about us in heaven can only be compared to adults talking about the silliness of little children thinking that they have it all figured out. And even that is a favorable look at us.

Click to expand...

Silly? We look silly when we understand it as it was written, when it is fully within His capabilities and He later based the work week on the same pattern of time? We are to look silly?

Nope.. not an good argument in my opinion..

I would feel silly if I was to think it was a lot longer and He left it up to mutations moving toward order when everything else in this universe moves from order to chaos...

So.. again.. nope.

K2K said:

If you care to believe it, the Lord spent a few months, a year or so after I got to know Him, and He went over Genesis with me.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I cannot go on here..

I'll take it as it was written. It is perfectly within His powers and capabilities.

Jipsah said:

The fact our Lord stood by His words when many of His followers were leaving because of them, and the fact that He was apparently willing to let the 12 leave as well without explaining what He "really meant" if they'd misunderstood Him. This wasn't on a par with Him using an obvious metaphor like "I am the Gate", which everyone appears to have understood as a metaphor and took no offense at.

66As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

This one drove away those for whom it was too "hard" a saying. It still does, doesn't?

My point is still that y'all are majoring in the minors. Believing in a 7 day Creation isn't in the Creeds, and as far as I know no one considers it to be of any ultimate importance. It's a bard's device for oral storytelling. In general the story is true. In detail - what detail? "God said...", and in the eyes of the storyteller, 'nuff said. He didn't know how, and no one ever will in this life. It's a God thing, and way above our paygrade. But our Lord's Words are the Words of God Himself, walking amongst us. To trivialize them and wave them off as a mere metaphor ignores the effect they had on those who heard them, and the fact that our Lord never made any effort to modify them to prevent losing followers.

This is really a case of tossing out the cornflakes and eating the box. Playing as though the purely background part of the story Creation is of ultimate importance, while the stern and difficult words of the Creator Himself and merely figures of speech. It appears to me to be based on a slavish devotion to a dearly held doctrine, or a basic worldly skepticism that says, "No, He can't really have meant that.

Click to expand...

I don't care if it's in the creeds or not..

Sorry.

JacksBratt said:

Well, respectfully.. I totally disagree with you on this point.

Click to expand...

Taking you literally, "totally" must mean that you disagree with everything in the quoted statement, including the part stating that the person it presents as its focus is living and is the very source of life, and that the Living Word of God is Jesus. Even the Bible maintains that.

JacksBratt said:

I think that we just need to agree to disagree.

You can believe the scientists....
or..
You can believe the words of the one who actually did it...

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I haven't said what I believe, in this thread. Basically I am seeing multiple interpretations of one chapter of the first book in the Bible, and I'm asking myself "so what?" How relevant is your argument to your daily behaviour as a human being, and if you'r a Christian, to your behaviour as an imitator of Christ? My main concern is that no one seems to relate their arguments to what Paul told Timothy was the ultimate purpose of God in giving us the Bible - "equiping us for good works." with those "good works" being what God defines as such. How does either side of the argument affect your daily behaviour and the call to "deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me?" And I mean this personally, i.e. to individuals on all sides of this endless debate.

ViaCrucis said:

What some seem to not be getting is that the point being raised by bringing up Jesus' words about the Supper is that those who are arguing that one MUST believe a literal six day creation are also those who argue that Jesus CAN'T literally mean it when He says the bread and wine are His body and blood.

To not accept Genesis 1 literally is to be accused of "not believing the Bible" to "call God a liar" and all other manner of slanderous things.

And yet, out of the same mouth is said that God cannot mean it when He says bread is His true flesh and wine His true blood.

The accusation against those who don't take Genesis 1 literally is that we don't take it literally because we are being influenced by modern science, philosophy, vain human reason, etc.

And out of the same mouth the arguments against the Supper being Christ's flesh and blood is that bread can't be flesh, that Jesus can't be present in the bread and wine if He is in His flesh with His disciples, or that He can't be both in heaven and also in His Supper at the same time, or that the infinite cannot fill the finie, and all manner of arguments based upon philosophy, human reason, and the like.

As long as the double standard and hypocrisy in these debates remain, you can expect that this hypocrisy is going to be called out.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

I understand the view of the literal body and literal blood at the Lords Table.

However, I don't see the same evidence for this to be literal. Sorry.. I just don't.

Christ says, about the cup.. "this cup is the new testament in my blood:" So, the Cup, to be literal, is the New Testament in His blood... Not "His blood".

About the bread.. He states: "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."

He actually calls it "bread".

Jesus, as He often did, was speaking symbolically. To say He was speaking literally here does not fit with the word pictures He often used. After all, Jesus said He was the Bread of Life. And didn't He say that He was the Door?

Genesis is literal... There is no figurative way around it.. It is punctuated by specifics...

Not the last supper where He is giving us symbols to remember Him by..


So, sorry to the OP for going a bit off track.. But the challenge was put out there that I cannot expect people to take six days of creation, literally, if I don't take this literally as well..

BobRyan said:

Everyone has free will - you can believe as you wish.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that the two statements above are logically linked.
If I am serious about giving my life to following Jesus, I am to deny myself. I belong to Him. I cease to have free will in the sense that most people seem to mean that term. And it's doubtful that anyone who has not submitted to God has free will in that sense either. "No man comes to me unless the Father draws him." Even our faith is a gift from God - not of our own will.

But that is an entirely different thread.