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.
I personally tend to go for:The only explanation I ever hear from them when pressed, is basically, "this contradicts my scientific theory, therefore it must be figurative." They never can actually produce a logical argument from the text as to why it's not literal.
There's nothing wrong with watching the football game. But getting out of your couch to switch on the TV is doing work, which is why God gifted America with the remote control.I am not saying it is not important. I am saying that we do not feel it is important today. Otherwise, we will want to have the spirit of Pharisees on every Sunday (or on whichever day taken as the Sabbath day). So the real question should be: Does Jesus make the Sabbath day less significant? Am I doing something wrong if I watched a football game on Sunday afternoon?
I do understand this discussion is a little off the topic of OP. But you may also take this discussion as a special issue which is related to the literal (?) meaning of Gen 2:3.
So I would say the Creation stories and Fall are metaphorical, the world wide Flood didn't happen and nor did the Tower of Babel.
Jesus believed the the flood happened and that it was literal. Why do you not believe the scriptures?
shernren:
Wouldn't a much easier defence against the Ezek 28:12-13 passage be this:
Ezekiel 28: 6-7,
6“‘Therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says:
“‘Because you think you are wise,
as wise as a god,
7 I am going to bring foreigners against you,
the most ruthless of nations;
they will draw their swords against your beauty and wisdom
and pierce your shining splendor."
To me this seems most obviously to be refering to an actual king and a prophecy of that king being overthrown and therefore making the reference to Eden metaphorical.
This doesn't necessarily prove the Creation story to be metaphorical too and this prophecy could be seen has having a second meaning in the form of the devil, but it does remove this a verse used by YEC.
Why do you not believe the scriptures?
Jesus says in Luke 17:27:
"People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all."
Jesus believed the the flood happened and that it was literal. Why do you not believe the scriptures?
The problem is is that if a person does not believe what the Bible says, then they are making a god of their own image. I'm not speaking of minor issues, I'm speaking about what God reveals about Himself, what He has done and about salvation. When we make a god in our own image we are breaking the first and second commandments.And this is the big problem we get into with other things as well, like with baptism and the LORD's supper. Christians are still Christians even with different views regarding a literal interpretation versus a metaphorical interpretation. So just because I don't believe bread and wine magically turn into organic human flesh and blood when they are 'consecrated' doesn't mean I am in disbelief, I just interpret the passage as a metaphor.
I do believe Genesis 1-11 is mostly literal, though. I simply cannot fathom viewing the accurate and detailed genealogy of Christ as a metaphor.
1) Jesus could have been appealing to common knowlegde.
2) Jesus wasn't omniscient
3) Jesus didn't write the New Testament
The problem is is that if a person does not believe what the Bible says, then they are making a god of their own image. I'm not speaking of minor issues, I'm speaking about what God reveals about Himself, what He has done and about salvation. When we make a god in our own image we are breaking the first and second commandments.
This too, is a problem. When we do not want to accept what the scriptures say some people try to explain way or come up with their own ideas.
The passage I quoted was Jesus' own words. Why do you not accept Jesus' own words?
The problem is is that if a person does not believe what the Bible says, then they are making a god of their own image. I'm not speaking of minor issues, I'm speaking about what God reveals about Himself, what He has done and about salvation. When we make a god in our own image we are breaking the first and second commandments.
I have presented the truth in God's word. It is up to you if you will accept it or not. My opinion or interpreation has nothing to do with it. It is what God's word says. Choose this day who you will serve: serve the One and only True God as presented in the Bible or follow your made up god. The choice is yours.
But so did I! All I did was quote the Bible. For some reason, creationists get nervous when I do that. A bit odd for people who claim to defend it, I've always thought, but I'm used to it by now.I have presented the truth in God's word. It is up to you if you will accept it or not. My opinion or interpreation has nothing to do with it. It is what God's word says. Choose this day who you will serve: serve the One and only True God as presented in the Bible or follow your made up god. The choice is yours.
I think that your butchery of theology has just convinced a lot of fence sitting lurkers that the bible isn't true. Reality itself contradicts the YEC view.The first book of the Bible is one that is debated between Theists and evolutionists. It is even discussed between Creationists and theistic evolutionists. This topic at times has been very heated. So in this post I will answer the question: Is Genesis 1-11 Literal or Allegorical.
To properly answer this question we must look to the whole context of scripture. We have firm clues throughout scripture that shows that Genesis 1-11 are literal.
First, we have the evidence of genealogies. In Matthew 1 and Luke 3 we have two complete genealogies for Christ all the way back to Adam. Now some argue that these two genealogies are two separate genealogies so which is the correct one. The answer is both. One genealogy is through Mary and the other is through Joseph; both genealogies work from Christ back to Adam.
Second, we have reference of Adam (1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14: Jud 1:14) and Eve (1 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:13) being actual people throughout scripture.
Third, we have reference to Eden (Isa 51:3; Eze 28:13; 31:9-18; 36:35; Joel 2:3) being an actual place.
Fourth, we have reference to other people mentioned in Genesis 1-11 as being literal people. Some of these people include Enoch (Heb 11:5; Jude 1:14) and Noah (Matt 24:37-38; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20; 2 Pet 2:5).
Fifth, there is continuity between Genesis 1 and 2. Some argue that Genesis 1 and 2 contradict each other. This simply is not true because Genesis 2 is not a second creation account, rather it is an extension of details to Genesis 1. Genesis 1 is chronological whereas Genesis 2 is the added details to the creation account.
Sixth, other references to Genesis 1-11 refer to some of the teachings found in these 11 chapters. The creation account is mentioned in Ex 20:11 as an actual event. Jesus (Matt 19:5; Mk 10:7) and Paul (Eph 5:31) mentions the teaching of how a man will leave father and mother to cling to his wife quoting Gen 2:24.
In closing, Genesis 1-11 is literal and true because the whole of scripture speaks to this being true, including Jesus, Paul, Moses and other Biblical people and writers.
I have presented the truth in God's word. It is up to you if you will accept it or not. My opinion or interpreation has nothing to do with it. It is what God's word says. Choose this day who you will serve: serve the One and only True God as presented in the Bible or follow your made up god. The choice is yours.
What is the point in presenting a series of arguments for interpreting Gen 1-11 literally, if you are not going to address people's replies to your arguments?The first book of the Bible is one that is debated between Theists and evolutionists. It is even discussed between Creationists and theistic evolutionists. This topic at times has been very heated. So in this post I will answer the question: Is Genesis 1-11 Literal or Allegorical.
To properly answer this question we must look to the whole context of scripture. We have firm clues throughout scripture that shows that Genesis 1-11 are literal.
First, we have the evidence of genealogies. In Matthew 1 and Luke 3 we have two complete genealogies for Christ all the way back to Adam. Now some argue that these two genealogies are two separate genealogies so which is the correct one. The answer is both. One genealogy is through Mary and the other is through Joseph; both genealogies work from Christ back to Adam.
Second, we have reference of Adam (1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14: Jud 1:14) and Eve (1 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:13) being actual people throughout scripture.
Third, we have reference to Eden (Isa 51:3; Eze 28:13; 31:9-18; 36:35; Joel 2:3) being an actual place.
Fourth, we have reference to other people mentioned in Genesis 1-11 as being literal people. Some of these people include Enoch (Heb 11:5; Jude 1:14) and Noah (Matt 24:37-38; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20; 2 Pet 2:5).
Fifth, there is continuity between Genesis 1 and 2. Some argue that Genesis 1 and 2 contradict each other. This simply is not true because Genesis 2 is not a second creation account, rather it is an extension of details to Genesis 1. Genesis 1 is chronological whereas Genesis 2 is the added details to the creation account.
Sixth, other references to Genesis 1-11 refer to some of the teachings found in these 11 chapters. The creation account is mentioned in Ex 20:11 as an actual event. Jesus (Matt 19:5; Mk 10:7) and Paul (Eph 5:31) mentions the teaching of how a man will leave father and mother to cling to his wife quoting Gen 2:24.
In closing, Genesis 1-11 is literal and true because the whole of scripture speaks to this being true, including Jesus, Paul, Moses and other Biblical people and writers.
It seem to me the difference between you and the other posters here, creationists and TE, is that we realise God is much bigger then our understanding of scripture. You do not seem to. You think the way that you understand scripture is what God actually meant and to disagree with you is to disagree with God. Which of us is making a god in our own image?The problem is is that if a person does not believe what the Bible says, then they are making a god of their own image. I'm not speaking of minor issues, I'm speaking about what God reveals about Himself, what He has done and about salvation. When we make a god in our own image we are breaking the first and second commandments.
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?