I'd have to wonder why the petroleum and natural gas industries are making so much money with their flawed geology. Money is the root of all evil, right?The only conspiracy I alluded to was that of the devil. Do you not believe in Satan?
YEC creates atheists because it makes people think Christianity can be scientifically disproven. Want to disprove Christianity? Prove the Earth is old or that evolution happened.
thought the rule of scriptural interpretation. Was that what scripture means in one place, It means it in another place -- the same words always mean the same thing.That really doesn't force a particular interpretation upon Genesis. And at any rate, the effect was indeed immediate. Man's communion with God was immediately disrupted and he was immediately subjected to the process of death as a result.
thought the rule of scriptural interpretation. Was that what scripture means in one place, It means it in another place -- the same words always mean the same thing.
if so, the words are a threat of active execution, not natural demise
The Biblical writers apparently implied that Solomon's court was like eden. Solomons court was Edenic. And Shimei was expelled from Eden. For a similar sort of Sin, much is Adam and Eve had been expelled in the days of Eden
Indeed, the next appearance of the Hebrew word Muwth in narrative occurs in Genesis 7:22, Genesis 18:25 and Genesis 19:19. In all cases, death derives from God's active wrath.
Most straightforwardly, Genesis 2:17. Was God's active threat of execution against Adam if he ate. The fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and bad.
Only God's Mercy stayed the execution. But since the Fall of man, humankind has existed under a divine sentence of wrath and judgment. God's divine sentence of wrath, and judgment had to be carried out and was carried out on the cross.
Hence, through Christ believers can once again re enter communion with the divine in good standing. And no longer under a sentence of Doom and wrathful judgment.
I giant rush of water wouldn't make U-turns.except you can't prove either. so it doesn't make atheists.
It doesn’t strike me that you are wondering very hard, nor that you have considered that being wrong on macro-conclusions does not exclude the possibility of having some things right. It seems pretty clear that you have chosen what to believe, and neither the fathers of the Church nor the Councils have any influence over a person who rejects their teachings.I'd have to wonder why the petroleum and natural gas industries are making so much money with their flawed geology. Money is the root of all evil, right?
I giant rush of water wouldn't make U-turns.
It does make atheists because many people feel pressured to believe in an Old Earth and evolution instead of believing it's all a conspiracy.
Genesis 18:25This is not how we view the statement from God at all. And it's not what the text says.
Death was a natural consequence of the fall, not a punishment borne out of the wrath of God. In the day you eat if it you will die - not in the day you eat of it I will kill you.
If God was such that He would have killed Adam for such a simple act of disobedience (then He didn't keep His word according to His threat) ... but not only that, where was this side of God when Satan fell and despoiled 1/3 of the angels, set himself against God, set in motion all the suffering/torment/illness/death/evil that humans would ever suffer - not to mention Christ's own suffering - where was that penalty for Satan when God could prevented all of that by carrying out a just sentence? And how is God good and loving in such a narrative? It doesn't make sense. It is born from a late century view of God that is more pagan than Christian in its nature.
And we don't have a simple book where we are restricted to comparing word order which forces parallel interpretation. It isn't foreign to us ... indeed there are far more parallels in our theology which are amazing to contemplate ... but we do not have only that but the understanding and voice of the Holy Spirit through many, just as the Holy Spirit spoke to give us the Scripture of the New Testament.
Someone else is better qualified to explain our point of view. But I know it is not so limited in either interpretation or in how we view the nature of God Himself.
Well, didn't Saint Paul make quite a stand early on, to the effect of "not putting barriers to entry in the way of those [gentiles] who would otherwise Believe" ?I giant rush of water wouldn't make U-turns.
It does make atheists because many people feel pressured to believe in an Old Earth and evolution instead of believing it's all a conspiracy.
Do you know what the Masoretic texts are?What on earth do you mean "reconstructed Hebrew"?!
"Much later" is a very misleading phrase to use to describe the LXX - the rubric by which we call it that would give a later date to the LXX than you want to claim, and the proto-MT text fragments we have show that it the MT tradition was quite conservative. This still doesn't explain the "reconstructed" part.My point was that especially if you're going to focus on a particular word - the LXX is more reliable than Hebrew contained in the much later Masoretic text, especially if no ancient fragment exists for that passage.
"Much later" is a very misleading phrase to use to describe the LXX - the rubric by which we call it that would give a later date to the LXX than you want to claim, and the proto-MT text fragments we have show that it the MT tradition was quite conservative. This still doesn't explain the "reconstructed" part.
Let me put it this way: putting a 10th century date on the MT is misleading and putting a 2nd century BCE date on the LXX is also misleading (by the way, we don't use the LXX for the whole OT, we use a different text for Daniel...). I'm still not getting what you mean to say by calling the Hebrew "reconstructed".
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?