Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That's right.Actually, you take a very easy route . . . you just say "no" to whatever evidence comes along. Hardly requires any actual effort.
I share your "pain," Indent.It’s a bit upsetting when Christians conduct a so-called “plain reading”, as it just doesn’t make a lot of sense. It hardly matters if a person is reading the Bible, Charlotte’s Web, or the daily news—to read is to engage in a process of interpretation, abstraction, representation.
Great stuff, Indent!! Very well said.It’s an inescapable reality, as we are dealing with cognitive processes. We are dealing with people, inspired or not.
You can have a plainly written news article, and all kinds of people will have all kinds of responses to it. You can revisit Charlotte’s Web over and over again and find what appears to be a new meaning/message behind it, whether the author intended it or not. The Bible has been debated inside and outside the Church for thousands of years.
To conduct a so-called “plain reading”, is to effectively communicate “I don’t care about the historical context.”
You make no effort to understand the worldview of the ancient Israelites, the world that these people are inescapably anchored in, but instead substitute a cultural understanding of the Genesis narratives. You want the Bible to be something it just isn’t prepared to deliver on.
What are we to make of Job, Ecclesiastes, the Psalms? What do these books tell us about what a spiritual life looks like? That Christ takes on humanity and meets us right in drama. I think Christians have a curious idea of what "faith" means.
It’s clear to me that the Christian God comes meet us at our cultural and intellectual limitations.
He didn't use Adam's name, In Mark 10 He quoted Genesis 2 by saying, " 6 But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’ This is also recorded in Matthew 4. In Matthew 23:35 He mentions Abel by name. Clearly these are real people.Where does Jesus mention Adam (or Eve) by name?
I'm seeing some little reference given by Jesus that in the beginning "He made them male and female," but .... no direct mention of names.
Jesus, however, was not.I also find it slightly odd that Josephus seemed to think that Moses was being a bit philosophical when describing the creation and fall of Adam and Eve.
He didn't use Adam's name, In Mark 10 He quoted Genesis 2 by saying, " 6 But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’ This is also recorded in Matthew 4. In Matthew 23:35 He mentions Abel by name. Clearly these are real people.
Jesus, however, was not.
Mark 13:19 also talks about the beginning when God created the world.
Possibly but I don't see a typo in my signature. Would you be kind enough to point it out?There's a typo in your signature.
Jesus taught the religious leaders when He was 12 years old. Though a child of man, He was perfect and free of sin with a hunger to learn all that the Scriptures taught. When He was baptized the spirit of the Lord came to Him and He was truly the son of God. He had knowledge that no other living person possessed. He spoke in parables which were easily understood. Though most of the people He encountered spoke commonly understood languages, There is no doubt that if He had encountered someone speaking Navaho that He would have been able to converse freely in that tongue. His access to unlimited intelligence was only a prayer away. Had he so requested it, legions of angels would have descended to protect Him. Instead He set a good example by submitting to the will of the Father.The trick here, KWC, is to realize that there wasn't much in the way of any alternative world-view for Jesus to consider, other than the Roman or Asian ones. Even Jesus didn't know everything about the future, and I'm surmising that the [pre-historic] past was generally unknown to Him too ... that is, while He was in human form for 30 some years.
You won't run out of you show more kindness today than you did yesterday.Possibly but I don't see a typo in my signature. Would you be kind enough to point it out?
Allegories didn't actually happen.
Thank you!You won't run out of you show more kindness today than you did yesterday.
You won't run out IF you show more kindness today than you did yesterday.
When I started to read through this thread I was truly hoping that this might shape up into a meaningful discussion. It had promise. Sadly, I was wrong and all of the promise was shattered. Asking hard questions is an important part of growth. Ignoring that which doesn't fit into one's worldview doesn't make it cease to exist. One cannot dismiss the scientific method simply because it may cause one to be uncomfortable. If one is a Christian, one also cannot avoid the Scriptures. The human race has a desire to learn and to understand all that is possible to learn and to understand. That desire has served humanity well and indeed has preserved humanity at times. If God chose to create through evolution it would not make him any less omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent. It would not make man any less fallen, any less in need of a savior or any less a creation. Jesus would still be both fully divine and fully man, His sacrifice would still be necessary for creation to be reunited with the Father and for us to be redeemed. Accepting that Genesis may be a collection of the oral tradition passed down through many generations doesn't deny the truthfulness, nor the inspiration of the Scriptures. It does however challenge you to believe in a God that teaches to the ability of the student to understand. Being that He created us I'm pretty confident that He would know where our limits were and where they are now. I believe in Theistic Evolution, however I recognize that some do not. That doesn't make me any more or less a believer and the same is true for the individual who believes in a literal 6 day creation. One last thought: This is not an original thought but I can't find it attributed to anyone. "It's not the Bible that I believe might be in error, it's your understanding of the Bible that I question."
Jesus taught the religious leaders when He was 12 years old. Though a child of man, He was perfect and free of sin with a hunger to learn all that the Scriptures taught. When He was baptized the spirit of the Lord came to Him and He was truly the son of God. He had knowledge that no other living person possessed. He spoke in parables which were easily understood. Though most of the people He encountered spoke commonly understood languages, There is no doubt that if He had encountered someone speaking Navaho that He would have been able to converse freely in that tongue. His access to unlimited intelligence was only a prayer away. Had he so requested it, legions of angels would have descended to protect Him. Instead He set a good example by submitting to the will of the Father.
He didn't believe the Scriptures were true out of ignorance. He KNEW they were true through divine knowledge.
Why is allegorical truth less truth than literal truth?
What, another evolutionary "just so" story? How unusual.
That's right.
I'm of the persuasion that a little child should be able to put a scientist in his place.
...
Think of this: Science cannot explain, much less recreate
life from non-life, and it has NEVER been observed, not
even anything close. ....
How about "any"? Would that be too mindblowing?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?