• 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.

JulieB67

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2020
2,059
895
57
Ohio US
✟205,457.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks, I agree with this too,


When I first started to discover these truths it really opened my eyes to other truths as well. But I love the fact that the bible does not have to disagree with science, etc. They can compliment one another on this issue.

And you're right, he definitely wouldn't have made the earth a wasteland. I haven't read anything from Watchman Nee but am interested.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,002
2,819
Australia
✟166,475.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Genesis 2

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. KJV

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. NIV

Even Wycliffe uses 'was'
2 Forsooth the earth was idle and void, and darknesses were on the face of (the) depth; and the Spirit of the Lord was borne on the waters [and the Spirit of God was borne upon the waters]. WYC

The word is not 'became' because there was never a previous creation. What do you envision this previous creation was for? God practising? Making a mistake?

How did it become that way even before man was created in the flesh?

Not sure why you are asking me since you are the one to hold to some previous creation before adam and Eve.

II Peter 3:5

That's the world of Noah and it was not billions of years ago.

Genesis 7
21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.


Luke

23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,

the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat,

the son of Levi, the son of Melki,

the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,

25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos,

the son of Nahum, the son of Esli,

the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath,

the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,

the son of Josek, the son of Joda,

27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,

the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,

the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melki,

the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,

the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,

29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer,

the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat,

the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon,

the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,

the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,

31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna,

the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan,

the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse,

the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,

the son of Salmon, the son of Nahshon,

33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram

the son of Hezron, the son of Perez,

the son of Judah,
34 the son of Jacob,

the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,

the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,

35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu,

the son of Peleg, the son of Eber,

the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan,

the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,

the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,

37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,

the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,

the son of Kenan, 38 the son of Enosh,

the son of Seth, the son of Adam,

the son of God.


While few people would say this is a complete list, it did not take billions of years to go from Noah to Jesus.


This is Noah's flood. God judged the world only once by water and like he judged it like this once, so it will be when Jesus comes again.
Matthew 24:37
But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.



Edit because I keep messing up the quotes.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Cis.jd

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2015
3,703
1,536
New York, NY
✟153,657.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Then that would mean no Adam, no Eve...no fall.

How do the non-literalist get around that?

there was a fall. But the details describing it isn't literal. I think you need to know the definition of literal, because it's like you think it means "it never happened". No, just not exactly as expressed in literary format.
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,701
1,957
✟77,658.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
there was a fall. But the details describing it isn't literal. I think you need to know the definition of literal, because it's like you think it means "it never happened". No, just not exactly as expressed in literary format.
Then tell me how it happened.

Just for the record there are several verses in the bible that present the Adam and the fall as literal.
 
Upvote 0

Cis.jd

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2015
3,703
1,536
New York, NY
✟153,657.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Then tell me how it happened.

Just for the record there are several verses in the bible that present the Adam and the fall as literal.

I really don't know how. Many theologist assume that the "forbidden fruit" was something sexual and Adam and Eve may have been more than 1 people.

satan wants you to read/understand the Bible as irrational and unintelligent as possible so that you can display christianity as nonsense that other people wouldn't want to be part of.
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,701
1,957
✟77,658.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private

Yes, there are those that do a lot of assuming...adding to scripture..to make a particular theology work.
Often they do this to force fit the bible into old earth evolutionism.
 
Upvote 0

Cis.jd

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2015
3,703
1,536
New York, NY
✟153,657.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Yes, there are those that do a lot of assuming...adding to scripture..to make a particular theology work.
Often they do this to force fit the bible into old earth evolutionism.

No one is adding anything, we are just accepting facts and trying to be educated in presenting our theology. I mean, by your reasoning.. if someone walked up to you and said the moon is an actual body of light because of how he took Genesis litereally, and you reply that it is just reflecting the light of the sun.. are you force fitting?
 
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,002
2,819
Australia
✟166,475.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

No, because the Hebrew allows for that. The wording used in Genesis is ambiguous and allows for two meanings, the moon as both light source and reflecting light. The same way the verse in Job says circle of the earth which allows for both spherical or flat earth models. Of course we can look up at the moon and see with the naked eye that it is spherical so that we can know that when the Hebrew said circle it means spherical circle not flat circle.

You do not have this with Adam and Eve, the Hebrew text was written in a historical literal form not poetic or parable or prophetic. The New Testament also has verses about both Adam and Eve as literal people as well. No, viewing Adam and Eve as anything but literal is people trying hard to twist scripture to fit into a world view not promoted by scripture.
 
Upvote 0

Cis.jd

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2015
3,703
1,536
New York, NY
✟153,657.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single

What aramaic/Hebrew word is that ambiguous that the meaning of "reflection" can be assumed in the context?
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,082
8,298
Frankston
Visit site
✟773,725.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
Look here....why do none of these translation use the word became? Just asking.
The same reason why the Greek word "Baptiso" was anglicised instead of translated "immersed". There are a lot of preconceived notions with Bible interpretations. Translators, when faced with a choice, are inclined to go with what is traditional. "Immersed" was never going to fly with the Roman Catholics and even the early reformers. "Was" likewise suited the prevailing theology. It is an acceptable translation.

I had an NIV study Bible many years ago. It had "became" as a possible translation in the margin notes. The theory is not new. Origen raised it in the third century.
 
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,002
2,819
Australia
✟166,475.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What aramaic/Hebrew word is that ambiguous that the meaning of "reflection" can be assumed in the context?

It's not something I can just pull from my memory, I would have to look it up again. I had a lot of info on a Word document which got corrupted. :/ I will see if I can find the info later or you could look it up yourself, but the Hebrew word used can mean both light source and/ or reflected light. I posted about it on one of the flat earth threads.
 
Upvote 0

Cis.jd

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2015
3,703
1,536
New York, NY
✟153,657.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single

Can you find it fast because i've been searching, and there is no credible source out there referencing a word that can both mean source or reflected. So i'm going to assume this was guessed out for the sake of having a retort.

But just in case you are telling the truth about the existence of such a hebrew word. Can I also assume that the moon is the source while the sun reflects it? Sounds silly right, but if there is a word that can mean both then why can't I assume such?
 
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,002
2,819
Australia
✟166,475.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

I looked through my older posts-but this site doesn't keep older ones nor does it have a good search function -does it?

Genesis 1:15
“Let them [sun and moon] be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give [emit] light on the earth.”

The Hebrew word used for emit/give light in this verse ('owr) can mean both “to be or become light” and “to be illuminated or become lighted up”

I didn't think it was of that much importance unless debating flat earth people, which was what I was doing. The flat earthers claim that verse says the moon makes it's own light so I quoted that to show it doesn't say that, it's ambiguous.
 
Upvote 0

Cis.jd

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2015
3,703
1,536
New York, NY
✟153,657.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single

But the word still has no reason to suggest the word reflect can be included. It still opens up the other question I gave, can the sun be suggested to be a reflector while the moon is the source? Since "owr" can be used in both contexts?
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,701
1,957
✟77,658.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private

Am I force fitting? No. In this instance the sun and moon are talked about in scripture. No where does scripture tell us the "forbidden fruit" was something sexual and Adam and Eve may have been more than 1 people.
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,701
1,957
✟77,658.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
But the word still has no reason to suggest the word reflect can be included. It still opens up the other question I gave, can the sun be suggested to be a reflector while the moon is the source? Since "owr" can be used in both contexts?
It could be. The bottom line is they both illuminate the earth. One brighter and the other lesser. As you guys are fond of saying...the Bible isn't a scientific text book.
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,701
1,957
✟77,658.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
What was that light on day one? There's a couple of possibilities.

The light could have been this from Revelation 21... 23 And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, because the glory of God illuminates the city, and the Lamb is its lamp.

The let there be light could have been when God created the brightly shining angels.

No one is forcing a literal Genesis. The Bible provides possibilities.
 
Upvote 0