The flood mystery solved, at last.

[ebia]

i think it would. if the hebrews of the exile can't be trusted to be honest, then what else might they be untrustworthy about?

Non-factual is not the same as dishonest

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

he's right though God says the whole bible is God breathed so its true if anything is not true God is a liar and we have no hope

is that in one of the pseudo letters of paul?

 

[Aman777]

Cow:>>The "literal" interpretation of Genesis ignores the fact that the original language is lost to mankind and the earliest manuscripts themselves are translations made by humans and humans cannot be perfect (the lone exception being Christ). It also ignores what is known about ancient Jewish thinking and tradition. It looks at scripture through modern eyes, not those of the time.

Dear Cow, Your view supposes that God is unable to speak to us today through His Holy Word. I also find that ancient thinking and tradition is one of the problems which faces us today. The ancient theology does NOT agree with science nor history and that leads many people to conclude that the Bible is wrong.

I believe God has correctly told us His Truth in Scripture and that Truth agrees in every way with every discovery of mankind. The problem is with the ancient interpretation which does not agree with science, history, nor scripture. When we have the correct interpretation of Genesis, it's easy to see that God's Truth is the Truth in every way. It's PROOF of God, since only God could have written the scientific Truth 3k years ago.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

Originally Posted by Frenchfrye

he's right though God says the whole bible is God breathed so its true if anything is not true God is a liar and we have no hope
​

His:>>is that in one of the pseudo letters of paul?

Dear His, Which letter of Paul is pseudo?

In Love,
Aman

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

Originally Posted by Frenchfrye

he's right though God says the whole bible is God breathed so its true if anything is not true God is a liar and we have no hope
​

His:>>is that in one of the pseudo letters of paul?

Dear His, Which letter of Paul is pseudo?

In Love,
Aman

Bart Ehman says that the pastoral epistles are written by someone else, pretending to be Paul. There is quite a concensus of opinion on this matter.
Bart also says that the bit about women shutting up, was inserted into that letter of corinthians.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

Non-factual is not the same as dishonest

if they used the epic of gilgamesh as a source, as i think they did, then they knew that the flood lasted 7 days, not 40. they knew that utnapishtim was a panthiest. they knew that the gods were ravenously hungry after the flood, and ate the sacrifice quickly. they knew that the gods were hacked off with the noise that the humans were making, not that people were all evil. etc etc.
so they made all that up. so it was deliberate, and dishonest.

 

[cow451]

that's because God himself says X is true so if it isn't that makes him a liar which is a sin and God cant sin. So X has to be true

The Bible (Genesis, specifically) as recorded by men says so. Big diff.

 

[cow451]

Cow:>>The "literal" interpretation of Genesis ignores the fact that the original language is lost to mankind and the earliest manuscripts themselves are translations made by humans and humans cannot be perfect (the lone exception being Christ). It also ignores what is known about ancient Jewish thinking and tradition. It looks at scripture through modern eyes, not those of the time.

Dear Cow, Your view supposes that God is unable to speak to us today through His Holy Word. I also find that ancient thinking and tradition is one of the problems which faces us today. The ancient theology does NOT agree with science nor history and that leads many people to conclude that the Bible is wrong.

I believe God has correctly told us His Truth in Scripture and that Truth agrees in every way with every discovery of mankind. The problem is with the ancient interpretation which does not agree with science, history, nor scripture. When we have the correct interpretation of Genesis, it's easy to see that God's Truth is the Truth in every way. It's PROOF of God, since only God could have written the scientific Truth 3k years ago.

In Love,
Aman

I wish you'd get the hang of using quotes.

That said, your response makes sense as only long as the reader doesn't think about it.

 

[KWCrazy]

Jesus used a lot of parables to teach religious truths, but i think that Jesus also believed that the various stories in the OT, like adam and eve and the fall, were historical events, and he probably would have accepted the creation account in genesis as well. that is what he would have been schooled in and there wasn't any alternative at that time, not for him anyway.

Jesus is the son of God. He knew the Scriptures were true because he was there. He verified that every word of the Scriptures were the inspired word of God, suitable for instruction. This is what is writtenin the Scriptures. To teach otherwise is false prophesy.

 

[KWCrazy]

if they used the epic of gilgamesh as a source, as i think they did, then they knew that the flood lasted 7 days, not 40. they knew that utnapishtim was a panthiest. they knew that the gods were ravenously hungry after the flood, and ate the sacrifice quickly. they knew that the gods were hacked off with the noise that the humans were making, not that people were all evil. etc etc.
so they made all that up. so it was deliberate, and dishonest.

How can you make justify this statement of Angelican belief; "Their Bible is a true and inerrant record of God’s interaction in history and is also His unchanging and perfect Word to His people;" with your claim that the flood story was made up from the epic of Gilgamesh? Are you unsure of the belief which you personally espouse, or do you simply desire to annoy Christians by calling the Bible a work of plagerism and lies?

source

 

[Aman777]

Aman:>>Genesis tells us of the day of the Big Bang, the fact that every living creature was brought forth from the water, that humans and natural man are NOT the same, that you can make other humans from the tissue of one, that we live in a Multiverse, the formula for making humans, how and when we changed from animal to human intelligence, and He explains WHY human civilization on this planet can be traced to Noah. The problem with most people is they cannot understand Scripture because they have too many pre-conceived notions which prevent their minds from understanding what is actually written.

Cow:>>So, one must make a human judgement as to whether it is literal. If I were living in the First century, I would accept this as historical fact because I would have no way to know any other explanation. But in the 21st Century, I have other information that leads me to see it as not literal historical fact.

Dear Cow, If you think Scripture is not literal, then tell us HOW ancient, prescientific men knew the things I listed. They had NO way to know these things and get them scientifically correct, but Scripture is correct. Only God could have possibly known these things, and told them to us so long ago.

Cow:>>Does it really matter if it was a regional or global flood?

It does IF you believe what Scripture tells us. It tells us the Ark was 15 cubits or 22 1/2 feet above the highest mountains of Adam's world. Does that sound like a regional flood or a global one?

Cow:>>Does it diminish the message if evry detail is not historically or literally accurate? Not to me.

It is obvious that you haven't had to support your beliefs to unbelievers. Do you tell them of your thinking? or do you just ask them to accept your views by blind faith?

In Love,
Aman

 

[KWCrazy]

Genesis tells us of the day of the Big Bang,

Yes, day 4,

the fact that every living creature was brought forth from the water,

False. Genesis 1: 24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

that humans and natural man are NOT the same,

False.

that you can make other humans from the tissue of one,

That GOD could.

that we live in a Multiverse,

Not really, More so that there is a spiritual and a physical world.

the formula for making humans,

Nonsense.

how and when we changed from animal to human intelligence

False. We always had human intelligence. The revelation was the knowledge of good and evil.

 

[Papias]

Aman wrote:

Which letter of Paul is pseudo?

Bible scholars have, for decades if not centuries, realized that some of the pauline letters were not written by paul.

Basic categories that nearly all ministers going into seminary learn in their first year:

Authentic Pauline letters:
Romans
1 & 2 Cor
Philippians
Gal.
1st thes
philemon

Disputed letters (not clear if these are by paul or not)
Ephesians
Colossians
2nd Thes.

Not by Paul
1&2 Timothy
Titus

Also, Hebrews was included in the Canon because early Christians thought it was by Paul, but the letter itself doesn't claim to be by Paul. Scholars have no idea who wrote Hebrews. Even Martin Luther said that "only God knows who wrote Hebrews".

There are other threads about this. It's off topic here, so I encourage you to look into it yourself, especially from scholarly, reliable sources. Here is one site that summarizes views of many scholars:
Early Christian Writings: New Testament, Apocrypha, Gnostics, Church Fathers

Papias

 

[cow451]

Dear Cow, If you think Scripture is not literal, then tell us HOW ancient, prescientific men knew the things I listed. They had NO way to know these things and get them scientifically correct, but Scripture is correct. Only God could have possibly known these things, and told them to us so long ago.

In Love,
Aman

Which is why God would speak to them in a manner of their day, not how it would be told if God were just now inspiring scripture authors. When did the size of the Ark become one of the crucial elements of the plan of salvation?

BTW: Link to FAQ on how to reply using quotes. It will make your posts much easier to read.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

How can you make justify this statement of Angelican belief; "Their Bible is a true and inerrant record of God’s interaction in history and is also His unchanging and perfect Word to His people;" with your claim that the flood story was made up from the epic of Gilgamesh? Are you unsure of the belief which you personally espouse, or do you simply desire to annoy Christians by calling the Bible a work of plagerism and lies?

source

anglicans have accepted evolution (i havn't) and they even apologised to darwin, which is silly because darwin is no longer around. that statement that you quoted there cannot be true for anglicans, as a belief in evolution ensures that they also believe that the bible is in no way a true and inerrant record of God's interaction etc. ... it can't be, as the ancestor list dosn't go back however many years their evolutionary timeframe requires. unless you put in enormous gaps in it.

i didn't say that the whole bible is lies, just the story of the flood, although i do think that other books in the bible are lies, but that's another matter.

i can't unlearn what i know. it makes it more difficult to believe, but then most people in the UK are now athiests or agnostics, and that isn't suprising.
there are a lot of problems with the bible, and saying that the bible is inerrant is silly, in my opinion, as it ignores 100s of years of investigation/analysis.
it's just harder to accept that some of the bible is plain wrong, and it's easier to try and make it work.

 

[Aman777]

Aman wrote:


Bible scholars have, for decades if not centuries, realized that some of the pauline letters were not written by paul.

Basic categories that nearly all ministers going into seminary learn in their first year:

Authentic Pauline letters:
Romans
1 & 2 Cor
Philippians
Gal.
1st thes
philemon

Disputed letters (not clear if these are by paul or not)
Ephesians
Colossians
2nd Thes.

Not by Paul
1&2 Timothy
Titus

Also, Hebrews was included in the Canon because early Christians thought it was by Paul, but the letter itself doesn't claim to be by Paul. Scholars have no idea who wrote Hebrews. Even Martin Luther said that "only God knows who wrote Hebrews".

There are other threads about this. It's off topic here, so I encourage you to look into it yourself, especially from scholarly, reliable sources. Here is one site that summarizes views of many scholars:
Early Christian Writings: New Testament, Apocrypha, Gnostics, Church Fathers

Papias

Dear pap, I'm sorry, but I don't pay much attention to the theories of men. Following is the reason:

1Jo 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in Him.

I believe that God placed the books He wanted in the Canon. I accept all of them as God's Truth.

In Love,
Aman

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

I believe that God placed the books He wanted in the Canon. I accept all of them as God's Truth.

In Love,
Aman

i don't.

 

[Frenchfrye]

i don't.

well what do you believe the bible is then

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

well what do you believe the bible is then

it's a collection of the history of the isralites (very pro isralite natually). prophets. some apocraphal stuff (daniel, revelation) apocraphal stuff which thankfully didn't make it into the bible, and the NT, most of which is reliable.
i think the bible has a continuous thread of inspiration, but there is stuff in there which isn't inspired, and legends, myths and distant memories.

genesis has recollections of the distant past, such as the tower of babel, and the time when the sons of God came to earth, but there is nothing much in the history, no real knowledge of the time before noah. that info needs to be got from examining the evidence around the world.

i think that human history goes back a lot further than 6000 years. as coal only has a trace reading of carbon 14, and yet a bell was found in coal, just shows that there is a mystery about the past, going back well before sumer, and india; a global civilisation, with one language and one writing.

that's what i think.

 

[Frenchfrye]

it's a collection of the history of the isralites (very pro isralite natually). prophets. some apocraphal stuff (daniel, revelation) apocraphal stuff which thankfully didn't make it into the bible, and the NT, most of which is reliable.
i think the bible has a continuous thread of inspiration, but there is stuff in there which isn't inspired, and legends, myths and distant memories.

genesis has recollections of the distant past, such as the tower of babel, and the time when the sons of God came to earth, but there is nothing much in the history, no real knowledge of the time before noah. that info needs to be got from examining the evidence around the world.

i think that human history goes back a lot further than 6000 years. as coal only has a trace reading of carbon 14, and yet a bell was found in coal, just shows that there is a mystery about the past, going back well before sumer, and india; a global civilisation, with one language and one writing.

that's what i think.

the world was like that before the flood that's what all the different ruins are found along the world