Taking Questions on Embedded Age Creation

[BCP1928]

LOL

Are you serious?

Absolutely. Genesis doesn't even literally identify the serpent with the NT Satan. Not to say he isn't, but Genesis doesn't literally say so.

View attachment 359828

Satan bruised His heel at the Cross ...

Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet,

Clearly, "bruise his heel" is a metaphor.

 

[BCP1928]

Yes, there is always more at stake than Dispensationalism, even if and when it's deemed otherwise by an Independent Baptist.

Don't tell AV I said that......................................................

Ah, yes. The intolerable burden of Sola Scriptura.

 

[AV1611VET]

Absolutely. Genesis doesn't even literally identify the serpent with the NT Satan. Not to say he isn't, but Genesis doesn't literally say so.

It's called progressive revelation.

Clearly, "bruise his heel" is a metaphor.

It's called a literal metaphor.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ah, yes. The intolerable burden of Sola Scriptura.

The Bible is a supernatural Writing.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The Bible is a supernatural Writing.

Since the Biblical writers don't say it exactly that way, then I guess we're at liberty to articulate how we think divine inspiration within the minds of the early Christian apostles, evangelists and other 1st century leaders "worked"----------since none of us really knows.

Personally, I prefer the term, "divinely orchestrated." In my more evangelical moments, I'd say it is "divinely motivated."

I mean, how many ways can we imagine a proper of interpretation of θεόπνευστος ?

 

[AV1611VET]

Since the Biblical writers don't say it exactly that way, then I guess we're at liberty to articulate how we think divine inspiration within the minds of the early Christian apostles, evangelists and other 1st century leaders "worked"----------since none of us really knows.

I love how Chuck Missler described the Bible:

"A message from outside the universe, written in spread-spectrum design, immune to hostile jamming."

 

[AveChristusRex]

Absolutely. Genesis doesn't even literally identify the serpent with the NT Satan. Not to say he isn't, but Genesis doesn't literally say so.

Clearly, "bruise his heel" is a metaphor.

If Genesis is a metaphor, then the crucifixion could also be [by this logic] a metaphor, so could the Apocalypse. Is this what we really want to entertain? This, to me, seems like confusion, so we cannot understand the Scriptures as God intended.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

If Genesis is a metaphor, then the crucifixion could also be [by this logic] a metaphor, so could the Apocalypse. Is this what we really want to entertain? This, to me, seems like confusion, so we cannot understand the Scriptures as God intended.

Actually, every book and letter in the Holy Library belongs to a certain genre of writing. Secondly, there's are differences in the mode of historiography that were at play at distinct eras in ancient history. There's quite a difference in the thinking and writing between the cultures of the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, and the Classical Age, as well as those of the Middle Ages, and then more so in our Modern Age.

Even if Genesis has some metaphor in its first few chapters, this does not imply that the writings of the New Testament were of the same sort of writing. They belong to an entirely different era. So, there's nothing to fret about.

 

[AveChristusRex]

Actually, every book and letter of in the Holy Library belongs to a certain genre of writing. Secondly, there's are differences in the mode of historiography that were at play at distinct eras in ancient history. There's quote a difference in the thinking and writing between the cultures of the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, and the Classical Age, as well as those of the Middle Ages, and then more so in our Modern Age.

Even if Genesis has some metaphor in its first few chapters, this does not imply that the writings of the New Testament were of the same sort of writing. They belong to an entirely different era. So, there's nothing to fret about.

True, but what I was saying is that Genesis is similar to the accounts of the Synoptic Gospels, and to not trust the exact details of the account, then an argument can be made to see the account of Matthew Mark Luke and John to be metaphors too, that is what is concerning

 

[2PhiloVoid]

True, but what I was saying is that Genesis is similar to the accounts of the Synoptic Gospels, and to not trust the exact details of the account, then an argument can be made to see the account of Matthew Mark Luke and John to be metaphors too, that is what is concerning

No. That's what I'm saying. Genesis was written in a different era (i.e. the Bronze Age) and its historiographical praxis is not the same as that of the Classical Era and/or 1st Century when the New Testament writings were produced.

So no, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John CANNOT be seen as metaphorical writings. They obviously report some of Jesus' parables, but those parables are simply a part of what we know is historical narrative.

Have you ever had a chance to study ancient eras within the field of Historiography?

 

[BCP1928]

If Genesis is a metaphor, then the crucifixion could also be [by this logic] a metaphor, so could the Apocalypse. Is this what we really want to entertain? This, to me, seems like confusion, so we cannot understand the Scriptures as God intended.

"Genesis is a metaphor" is a meaningless statement. A metaphor is a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable. It can be used in writing across a wide variety of literary genres.

 

[BCP1928]

True, but what I was saying is that Genesis is similar to the accounts of the Synoptic Gospels, and to not trust the exact details of the account, then an argument can be made to see the account of Matthew Mark Luke and John to be metaphors too, that is what is concerning

Not at all similar. They were written in different languages in different styles centuries apart to suit different literary agendas. In any case only an ignorant fool would ever make the kind of argument you indicate.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

"Genesis is a metaphor" is a meaningless statement. A metaphor is a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable. It can be used in writing across a wide variety of literary genres.

You beat me to the punch on the next thing to tell him. Thanks.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Not at all similar. They were written in different languages in different styles centuries apart to suit different literary agendas. In any case only an ignorant fool would ever make the kind of argument you indicate.

It could also just be the case that he's a young guy and hasn't had the chance to study Historiography and how all of that can apply to the biblical literature.

 

[AveChristusRex]

It could also just be the case that he's a young guy and hasn't had the chance to study Historiography and how all of that can apply to the biblical literature.

Ehh, im more into philology, Orthodox-Catholic ecumenism, Catholic law, and Mariology, so it isn't my field specifically, I leave that up to people like AV who are far smarter and wiser on these subjects than I am, though we disagree on some topics.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Ehh, im more into philology, Orthodox-Catholic ecumenism, Catholic law, and Mariology, so it isn't my field specifically, I leave that up to people like AV who are far smarter and wiser on these subjects than I am, though we disagree on some topics.

Ok. Fair enough. Some aspects of Philology will run synchronous to those in Historiography, so you might keep that in mind.

 

[BCP1928]

Ehh, im more into philology, Orthodox-Catholic ecumenism, Catholic law, and Mariology, so it isn't my field specifically, I leave that up to people like AV who are far smarter and wiser on these subjects than I am, though we disagree on some topics.

Mind you, I disagree with literal inerrancy as an approach and have no personal use for it. But if a person adheres to it and it brings him closer to Christ to do so, that's up to him. What I particularly object to is the amount of slander, hostility and condemnation directed at those Christians who do not adhere to it, even in forums like this which are heavily monitored against that sort of thing.

 

[QvQ]

Do you have enough faith that your prayers can move mountains like the Bible says? Yes or no

OK since you asked
My immediate response was Yes
I thought about my reasons for that immediate response. Checking the validity of the source material, so to speak
And the answer is still Yes.

 

[Kylie]

1836

And I dealt with that here: 1864.

Or did you just ignore that?

 

[Kylie]

But the entire point was about scientifically testing the supernatural, namely God.

Are you suggesting the Bible is presenting a mountain moving from one place to yonder place as a result of prayer is a NATURAL phenomenon?