What's the largest number mentioned in the Bible?

[Mistermystery]

Awww, but who will lose the the arguement when it counts. When it comes to that point, YEC, OEC, TOE etc... won't make a difference. Not even the theories of science. We will be judged exactly how God's word says we will be. No YEC, No OEC, No TOE belief will change it. And none by themselves get you into the kingdom.

That's your belief and you are welcome to believe that there is a God and that there is a Judgement day. However if you could keep your mind on the topic at hand you will see that what you wrote was not true (par example.: the dead sea scrolls thing).

But what is true is what is written in God's word. I have yet to find anyone that can prove otherwise with any solid evidence. Only mere opinions of someone else who says it's not. I can write a book and say whatever I want, and some will believe it. But it don't make it true.

Define God's word, Define solid evidence, Define if you mean a litereral or a Theological interpretation.

On a small side-note: What was the purpose of this thread?

 

[Nathan Poe]

****** the arguement with man ** not ** **** much. For man **** *** ***** me on judgement day. So you or anyone else here *** the least of my worries. Awww, ******* you *** me worried for a minute *** you?

Translated into Verbless Hebrew...

 

[Nathan Poe]

Awww, but who will lose the the arguement when it counts. When it comes to that point, YEC, OEC, TOE etc... won't make a difference. Not even the theories of science. We will be judged exactly how God's word says we will be. No YEC, No OEC, No TOE belief will change it. And none by themselves get you into the kingdom.

Which makes YEC not only scientifically unsound, but theologically worthless, since belief in it will not get anyone into heaven.

But what is true is what is written in God's word.

Pay no attenion to all that "Creation" lying around you; the book is all that matters. Check.

I have yet to find anyone that can prove otherwise with any solid evidence.

have you considered meeting more people?

Only mere opinions of someone else who says it's not. I can write a book and say whatever I want, and some will believe it. But it don't make it true.

You've just described YEC "Science" in a nutshell.

 

[gluadys]

Since the dead sea scrolls are the earliest known writting, and most cannot be read, Are you sure that what you claim is valid?

I take it you mean the earliest extant biblical texts. They are far from being the earliest known writing.

In any case they are irrelevant to the issue. You were speaking of Greek numerals. The earliest translation of Genesis into Greek (and one the KJV translators may have been familiar with) was the Septuagint. Since the Hebrew does not say "millions" and you were talking about Greek numerals, it seemed natural to go to the text of the Septuagint (see link in previous post) and find out if the KJV translators got their "millions" from the Greek.

But the text of the Septuagint does not support that thesis. It says the same as the Hebrew text "thousands of thousands" aka "ten thousands" not millions.

And as far as oral tradition goes. It was important to memorize certain facts about history and linage of a person's family. To forget it would be like losing all your identification and no one believes you that has never seen you before. This is why it is written in God's word about who begat who. It was that important. To us, the part we usually skip while reading the Bible. And that show's the difference in it's importantance back then compared to today.

I am not questioning the accuracy of oral tradition, especially among those trained to maintain it. What I question is that the oral tradition which supposedly maintained the meaning of the number in Genesis 34:60 as "millions" somehow missed the translators of the Septuagint (who were Jewish) yet managed to get to the gentile translators of the KJV 1700 years later. Just how does a Jewish oral tradition on that text manage to make that temporal and cultural leap--especially when England at the time did not permit Jews to live in the country?

 

[lucaspa]

I thought the hebrew language had no verbs. Having no verbs would make the translation to english impossible.2ti 3:16Every scripture inspired of God [is] also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.

Inspiration
that extraordinary or supernatural divine influence vouchsafed to those who wrote the Holy Scriptures, rendering their writings infallible.

You were doing so well up to the "infallible".

Yes, the verse from 2 Timothy does say scripture is useful and, if you look at my post I was showing how it was profitable for teaching. I was saying that your literal interpretation was, in fact, missing most of the profit in Genesis 1-3.

What you are doing here with your quote about "inspiration" is simply repeat the fallacy of Fundamentalism -- that the Bible is "inerrant" in a literal interpretation.

And that is the difference between Fundamentalism and the rest of Christianity. It is only the Fundamentalists (from 1905) that have insisted that "inspiration" means "infallible".
http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran1.htm

"With regard to the Bible, inspiration denotes the doctrine that the human authors and editors of canonical scripture were led or influenced by the Deity with the result that their writings many be designated in some sense the word of God."

1. B.M. Metzger & M.D. Coogan, "The Oxford Companion to the Bible," Oxford University Press, New York, NY, (1993), Pages 302.

So, not all Christians agree that "inspired" means "infallible". In fact, most Christians don't.

We do not say that they contain, but that they are, the Word of God. The gift of inspiration rendered the writers the organs of God, for the infallible communication of his mind and will, in the very manner and words in which it was originally given.

And here is where you part company with most of Christianity. Ironically, this statement fits more with Mormonism and Islam than Judaism or Christianity. Both claim what this claims: that the Book of Mormon and the Quran were directly dicated by God and are God speaking.

Now, I find this claim rather strange for the Bible. The Bible has quotes where God is actually speaking and then long parts where He is not. The Quran doesn't quote God, because the whole book is God talking. So the simple structure of the Bible having quotes from God in it seem to refute your claim.

 

[lucaspa]

Losing the arguement with man is not to lose much. For man will not judge me on judgement day. So you or anyone else here are the least of my worries. Awww, thought you had me worried for a minute did you?

Ikester, we have been pointing out that you are making a false idol out of the Bible. Particularly a man-made interpretation of it. In the process you are ignoring God's second book -- Creation.

Now, I can't see how ignoring God and making a false idol can end well. You may not be worried, but we are worried for you.

 

[lucaspa]

Awww, but who will lose the the arguement when it counts. When it comes to that point, YEC, OEC, TOE etc... won't make a difference. Not even the theories of science. We will be judged exactly how God's word says we will be.

And we are afraid that judgement will go against you. Why? Because you don't have "God's word", but a failed human interpretation of that word. Yet you won't take the log out of your eye and see that what you say is God's word and what is God's word are not the same thing.

I think if you stick to YEC and keep ignoring what God is telling you in creation, it may be important. After all, we are supposed to listen to God.

But what is true is what is written in God's word.

1. Is everything that is true in a literal interpretation of the Bible? Are there true things not in the Bible? Do you believe in Trinity? Trinity is not in the Bible. Yes, there are passages that link Jesus to God and God to the Holy Spirit, but there is nothing in the Bible to link Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

I have yet to find anyone that can prove otherwise with any solid evidence. Only mere opinions of someone else who says it's not.

If this is referring to YEC and science, you won't see anything unless you open your eyes. As St. Augustine said "the great book ... of created things. Look above you; look below you; read it, note it." St. Augustine, Sermon 126 in Corpus Christianorum You apparently won't even look at God's second book.

I can write a book and say whatever I want, and some will believe it. But it don't make it true.

But when God writes the book, don't you think you should believe it? This is where we worry for you. Apparently you think you don't have to believe God. Or you don't really believe God created, and thus Creation isn't God's book. Either one should cause you to worry.