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.
Originally Posted by brinny
The Bible is merely a beckoning to look to the One Who wrote it. As far as convincing someone that is truly the Word of God, that is the job of the Holy Spirit, not ours. God, moving in a heart, is what softens it and opens spiritual eyes...i once was blind but now i see. God will do this. We cannot.
Originally Posted by sacerdote
Amen but we can stand in testimony of our Lord and His written Word by our living example and through talking about them when asked or if we feel the time is right to bring the Lord up to a preChristian.
Amen. However, it's not recommended if you are shaky about your beliefs from the gitgo or if you're confused about the God you say you believe in. My question then becomes, what is the motivation for sharing at that point...seems like the witnessing is more successful coming from those posing questions to the 'witness-er' since said person is starting to say...well yeah, they did raise a good point, maybe it's not really true, but just a myth or a story, or maybe God was just joking......
The Holy Spirit needs to speak through us. We cannot do this in our own strength.
This might help clarify:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwbps9k5Dj0
sacerdote: Thank you. My calling is a good and important one. But sometimes, a new believer can communicate better about matters of faith and coming to Christ than a preacher can. Sometimes people on the fence or those sincerely looking for answers but are not Christian will listen to the new believer (before he/she will go to church and listen to a pastor) and can relate better to them.
Are we saying that the Bible is all to be taken literally? I am happy to do this if this is God's will but it does lead to some difficult decisions.
For example, Jesus tells us to cut out our eye if it causes us to stumble in our way to the Lord, for it is better to enter the Kingdom of Heaven without one eye than for our entire bodies to be condemned to Hell.
I try as much as I can not to find people visually attractive but I know that I have done in the past. Should I really take my eye out and cast it away?
are you suggesting that the holy spirit alone tells us what is literal and what is not?....did you watch the video sacerdote?
That includes but is not limited to the clues that tell us what is allegory, parable, history, etc.
without making this longer than it should be, look into literature classes. My nine year old is reading today the story of the A Farmer, His Son, and Their Donkey. How do we know what kind of story this is? Well, for starters, it has a moral, or lesson. The point of the story is to teach us something. Compare that to a history lesson. A history lesson is to inform us of something that happened. If we are good, we will learn something from it, but the lesson is not to teach us a lesson or moral, but rather to convey information. How do we know this? Well, we read it and see that there is no moral offered at the end. Read the story of Noah's ark for example, is there a moral at the end of the story? A parable is characterized by it's lesson and comparisons. So when we read a parable, we will note that it is a parable because it compares things to make a point (hint in scripture most parables tell us before hand it is a parable). These are the kinds of clues that we grow up learning about literature and then try to throw away when we read the bible. If there is still question after using these clues, we can do two things, seek the Holy Spirit and seek out the advice of scholars. But for the most part, every part of scripture can be evaluated using the common literary clues to determine the purpose or intend of the passage. I would suggest one common problem with this is in the case of poetry in the bible. The problem with the clues there is the translation. Poetry often does not translate well into other languages, though often the very formate will give us those clues or the text itself might say, a song or poem to...Can you help with explaining what these "clues" are?
I thought that the Noah story was a parable but the chaplains tell us that it is a literal, historical event. As such, I don't think I am reading the clues well.
Thank you.
If I say to you, "I'd give my right arm for a bowl of homemade ice cream" or "cut off your nose to spit your face" these types of comments are not intended to say, I will literally cut off my nose, or arm, but rather to convey the message of the importance to me or someone else. Jesus is trying to show us the importance of the concept, and it fits with all the other such statements that we have. The key to this whole thing is using the common literary clues that convey much to us, and applying those things to scripture. If you think I would literally cut off my arm for a bowl of ice cream, your missing the point of the comment. The comment is to convey how badly I want that ice cream, not a literal cutting off the arm, but rather a description of degree of importance.I've read the whole Bible. That's why I know so much about it and I know what Jesus tells us to do.
I did think it was supposed to be metaphorical in part but as the chaplains have said, the Noah story is a true historical story and the Bible is a literal book of fact. I am now happy to believe this as this is what God tells us and I believe that over scientists and atheists.
I just want to know if I should cut out my eye, as Jesus said, so as to avoid being comdemned to Hell. Sorry if me asking these questions on here is wrong. I thought it was a good place to discuss my explorations in faith.
Keep in mind two things as you look at the story of the flood. 1. many people read tradition into the bible. In fact, I took on the question of a universal flood some time ago. What I found is that the biblical flood, does not specify if it was world wide of massive local. It does talk about all mankind. Now consider that all man began as two people in a local area. It would not be unrealistic to expect that all man was still locally located. The key to keeping traditional reading out of the text is to study, and honestly, God commands us to study. so if you have a question, study the text. It's much easier today than ever before, we have all kinds of on line study aids, from concordances to word studies and commentaries. Don't allow traditional readings to cloud what the text really says. Now that is not to say that it was not universal but rather that from the text we cannot know. From the text, what we can know if that all mankind, except Noah and his family of course, were killed. We can do some scientific exploration to find out about that, and the early results seem to evidence a massive flood, but not all the evidence is in. Wow did I get off topic, point is this, don't allow tradition to be read into the biblical text, study it and find out what it really says. 2. the text says that God brought the animals in, not Noah. which basically means the question is not if Noah could bring in all the animals, but whether God could. A God who is said to be able to tame Leviathan. Again, these things come from study not just reading which is not a popular idea in the church today. So the second warning is to study before passing judgement.Thanks Razzelflaben. That's really helpful.
I'm still a bit confused though as so many seem to think the Noah and his ark story is an historical event and yet other believers, like me (I think), look at the history of the time and see that no such flood ever happened and realise that there is no way Noah could have rounded up each of the creatures on God's earth and put them ALL in a boat which was then sea-worthy enough to survive the worst weather the world has ever seen.
having studied the text, I find nothing that would suggest that it is both, historical and metaphoric. which is possible in literature. Now I would like to see more science, to tell us the history, but without that we can say with certainty that it is metaphoric. We can also say that it appears to also be historic but would need some evidence to varify some facts of that evidence. For example, the science shows a massive flood in the general area. So we can conclude it has historical basis.So what is it? Allegory or History? And if we cannot agree on a story as pivotal as that, how do we know what to take as fact and what to take as metaphor?
Actually, and though I'm an odd nut, I think questions are the backbone of our faith. I think that questions spur us to a deeper faith and a closness to God like those who do not question can never have. so as far as I'm concerned ask all the questions you can, just don't forget to study to find the answers. and of course pray for God to reveal HImself to you. In fact, I have yet to find a contradiction that others stumble over simply by asking questions and earnestly seeking God's answers.I know we are to turn our eyes away from anything which makes us question our faith and I am sorry if I should not be looking into things so deeply. I don't think I am questioning my faith at all. I love God and Jesus and so I will believe the stories in the Bible over the evidence on earth if that is what I must do to get into heaven. I don't think that means I should ignore what scientists say though. Does it?
God Bless.
I have not studied Horus individually. I have studied some other religious, in fact, one of my favorite college courses was non western religion. I really enjoyed it and would recommend a study into it. What I can tell you from the study of other religions is this, many have similar stories of everything from the messiah or savior of it's people to the creation of the world. it is common. I personally think there are two main reasons for this as far as history and human nature are concerned 1. truth is hard to escape. We can escape parts of truth, but if we abandon all truth then deception is much harder to pull off. So if we leave parts attached, parts of truth, then the deception is much easier. (more on that in a moment, as to which is truth, etc.) 2. When something works, human nature wants to copy it and make it theirs so they can succeed too.That's great. Thanks razzelflabben.
I hope you don't mind if I switch things slightly, then. From the other thread, I got to reading about the parrallels between Horus and Jesus. Horus was an Egyptian god whose story was told in the centuries before and during Jesus' time and the writing of the gospels.
The Religious Tolerance website has a good comparison of the life of Jesus and that of Horus. People seem to think that the fact that the Horus story is almost identical to that of Jesus that it means the gospels are just a copy of that story. I see why they would think that but I think that is blasphemy and I want an answer to how they can be so similar. Have you studied this and can you help?
For example, Horus is conceived by a virgin mother called Meri and born on the 25th December with a foster father of royal decent, having been announced to his mother by an angel.
Horus' birth is heralded by a star in the sky and announced by angels, witnessed by shepherds. The baby Horus is then visited by 3 solar deities. Herut then tries to kill him during his infancy. He is baptised at the age of 30 by Anup the Baptist who is then beheaded.
He is then tempted by the Egyptian version of Satan, "Set" on a mountain in the desert. Horus resists the temptation.
Horus has 12 disciples, walks on water, heals the sick, restores sight to the blind, gives a sermon on the mount and casts out demons.
Horus is transfigured on a mountain, crucified along with 2 thieves and then buried in a tomb.
Horus then decends into Hell before being resurrected and discovered by women before reigning for 1,000 years in the millennium.
How are we supposed to read the parrallels? is this something you have studied? I'd love your help.
God Bless.
apparently I didn't offend too bad with my little rantThat's brilliant!
Sock it to the evolution believers. Creationism rules.
God Bless.
Well, Christianity is a big, big bunch of people and I don't think that it's ever going to happen that "all" of us switch our thinking on any issue. However, take heart. The vast majority of Christians view the Noah story, and the rest of the book of Genesis for that matter, as metaphorical.
You are missing two huge things here. 1. the account of Gen, creation is not written as a scientific treatise, that doesn't mean it is scientifically inaccurate but rather that it's purpose to us, is not one of scientific explanation. A really good example of this is a common historical novel. Where a good one leaves the historical account accurate, the work is still a fiction and should not be viewed as a historical record. The same is true here, Gen. is not written as a scientific paper to explain to us the origins of the world, that does not mean it is scientifically inaccurate, what it means is that it cannot be used to scientifically prove the world's origins, because, there is another intent, another purpose for the work.It's nice to be put into a category without being asked. I suspect that it's been a long time since some people have read Genesis, and when they do again they'll realise just how much of it is of real importance and not metaphorical significance. Plus if the flood of Noah's day was only a local event, why didn't God ask Noah to move out of the area?
the bible tells us that as it was in the days of Noah...Matthew 24:37I'm sorry but I keep thinking about this and I've come back to thinking that the Ark story just doesn't seem possible to be literal.
"The Lord saw that the wickedness of humankind was great in the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that he had made humankind on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart." (Genesis 6:5-6)
Why did God do that then but not now when we have so much evil in the world?
God did not spare the "lovely" but the righteous. Two things to keep in mind. One there were a lot fewer people than today, and two, righteous people are hard to come by today, even in the church.Why did God wipe out all but one family? Surely there must have been other people alive then who were lovely people?
Now this one is not in scripture as best I can tell, however, I suspect it has to do with two things, 1. how He chose to kill man and 2. that if He did not kill animals too, they would have been over populated for the people that repopulated. But I think this one will have to wait till we are face to face with our Lord to know for sure.Why did God kill everybody and everything apart from two (or so) of everything? Surely they didn't all deserve that?
Does any of that help? It is important in studying or reading any literary work to look for consistencies and explainations other places in the text. For example, the condition of evil man. There are other biblical references to the actual condition of man and without them, we simply don't know what is intended. In literature, it is rare to find inconsistent ideas in the same author so consistence is vital to understanding literature including the bible. If we assume that the bible is the word of God (therefore one author) Keep in mind different styles of writing because of inspired word. Then we should expect all the teaching to be consistent throughout. If they aren't, either we misunderstood or the bible is not the Word of God.This is the not the omniscient, omnipotent, all-loving God I believe in. This must be a parable or can someone explain?
Thank you.
actually what I am saying is that so far I have found nothing that would suggest the bible is not the Word of God but many people who claim otherwise because they don't read it and study it as they would any other record."If they aren't, either we misunderstood or the bible is not the Word of God."
Are you saying that the Bible isn't the word of god?
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?