[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]mse2us wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]mse2us wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]mse2us wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
But…you had simians evolving (dying) for millions of years…then simian/human hybrids…then Neanderthals etc. and eventually POOF somehow, some way, somewhere the first man appears…and he commits sin…is condemned to death for it…and dies (after bearing human children)?
Now are you telling this first man’s father and mother who also died…did not commit sin? They died for some other reason?[/quote]
I don’t know whether the chicken or the egg came first. Man or his parents. Nor do I know when sin entered the world and the struggle began. I do know this, God created everything including man. God clearly made us differently than the other animals. I know sin entered the world through the choice of man.
I also know there were people around before Genesis was written and while it may an account of creation, it’s not exactely a first person rendition. It’s also meant for an audience 7000 years ago. If you were to start explaining evolution, science, biology, the universe, I am pretty sure you would have lost them.
Genesis is woven together from several stories. It has 2 creation stories, the second older than the first. I don’t think it was ever intended to be a factual account.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/gen1st.htm[/quote]
Pat, do you believe in Jesus? If you believe in Jesus then you should believe in the Genesis account because Jesus mentions both the creation of man and Noah and the flood.
At Mark 10:6-9 Jesus states:
“However, from the beginning of creation 'He made them male and female. 7 On this account a man will leave his father and mother, 8 and the two will be one flesh’; so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God yoked together let no man put apart.”
In the verses mentioned above Jesus quotes Genesis 1:27 where it states “He made them male and female” and he mentions “from the beginning of creation” which of course is the creation account in Genesis.
At Matthew 24:37-39 Jesus refers to the Noah and the flood account and paralells what happened in the days and years leading up to the flood with what will happened during the days and years during Jesus’ presence leading up to Armageddon.
Matthew 24:37-39 states:
“For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 38 For as they were in those days before the flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark; 39 and they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.”
It’s clear that Jesus believed in the Genesis account not only because he quotes specific verses from Genesis but he also had a first hand account because he was in heaven when both of the above accounts took place.
You are right that Genesis took place before Moses wrote it. The creation of Adam in Genesis took place about 2500 years before Moses wrote Genesis. And the flood event took place about 850 years before the writing in Genesis. Apparently, God told Moses either directly or through holy spirit about what took place from the beginning of creation up until Moses’ time.[/quote]
I do not think that Pat is saying that the Genesis did not take place.
I will say that Jesus quotes the Old Testament all the time. Why? Because he was talking to the Jewish people. These are the stories that they grew up on and understand. Just because he talks about it does not mean that it means literal, but could mean figuratively. Jesus uses Hyperbole all the time. Jesus also uses the term “I AM” which to a Jewish person means that he is God. Is he speaking literally or figuratively here?[/quote]
D, I don’t think you really understand the use of Jesus illustrations and the purpose of when he quoted scriptures. I’ll try to clarify this for you.
Jesus used illustrations when he was teaching something new to his listeners to paint a mental picture so they could better grasp what he was teaching. Most of his illustrations were of story length and had characters. Jesus generally drew his illustrations from the surrounding creation, from familiar customs of everyday life such as sheep and shepards, harvest, slaves, or fishing. Or from occasional happenings or not-impossible situations, and from recent events well known to his hearers. None of the famous illustrations such as the Wheat and the Weeds, the neighborly Samaritan, the prodigal son, the rich man and Lazarus do you see Jesus quote from the Hebrew scriptures. You can’t find any of these stories in the Bible so Jesus most likely made them up to help his listeners understand his teaching.
You’re using the wrong word when you say “figuratively.” When one speaks figuratively, the figure of speech or metaphoric statement in its entirety means something else and is not to be taken literally. Such as when someone says “I’m going to kill you” when you’ve upset that person. Jesus’ illustrations were not like this because when he used illustrations they represented a truth Jesus was trying to teach and if the listeners were able to understand what the illustration was teaching they were to take it literally. The characters, setting and story represented different parts of something literal. So Jesus spoke symbolically not figuratively. For example, the Wheat and the Weeds illustration mentioned at Matthew 13:24-30. Jesus explains what each part of the illustration means at Matthew 13:36-42. Another example is at Matthew 9:11-13 when Jesus was eating with with tax collectors and sinners and the Pharisees criticized him for doing so. Jesus told them that persons in good health do not need a physician but the ailing do. In this illustration Jesus was the physician and the ailing are the tax collectors and sinners. Even when he spoke in hyperbole such as at Matthew 7:1-5 which talks about removing a straw from someone’s eye when there is a rafter in your eye. The straw represents a small weakness or small sin and the rafter represents an even bigger weakness or bigger sin. So when one understood this they would get the sense that he should not judge or try to correct someone when he has a big glaring weakness that he needs to work on. Do you get what I’m trying to say?
Jesus quoted from the Bible because the people of his day were versed in the law and the Bible available at that time. As you stated in one of your post the Jewish religious leaders even had the Bible memorized. So when Jesus quoted from the Bible the listiners were more likely to believe what Jesus was saying the same way we hope people believe us when we quote scripture to back up a belief. When Jesus quoted from the Bible he did this usually to help the listeners discern that he just fulfilled a Bible prophecy, to condemn the hardhearted based on Bible prophecy or to explain why something must occur based on the passage he’s quoting. Jesus did not use any quotes from the Hebrew scriptures in his illustrations. At Mark 10:6-9 when Jesus quotes from the Genesis account he is answering a question about divorce; no illustration was used. At Matthew 24:37-39 when Jesus compares the days and years during his presence leading up to Armageddon with the days and years in Noah’s day leading up to the flood he does state it in an illustrative manner because he compares to things but this is unlike any of the illustrations I listed above and unlike any of the illustrations Jesus is famous for.
So when Jesus quotes from the Hebrew scriptures one should have more faith in the Hebrew scriptures as being still valid for today and inspired by God. The point I was trying to make to Pat was since Jesus quoted the two specific events Pat said were made up and not to be factual in his post if one has faith in Jesus then you should believe the two specific events Jesus referenced from the Hebrew scriptures as actual events and not moral stories or figurative stories as you stated.
I hope that helps.[/quote]
First, my questions were rhetorical. I wanted you to think about what you are saying.
Second, if you are going to take the Bible as 100% literal then you have to look at the verses as what they say. You can not pick and choose what fits your doctrine and what doesn’t and dismiss it. I have told you my reasoning for every verse you have put down. You may not like my reasoning, but it is. You just dismiss my verses as translation errors.
Third, you say that the parables were easy stories for the people to understand. I would like to argue the opposite. Jesus tells a parable the disciples do not understand what they mean. Jesus a lot of the times have to pull the disciples aside to explain to them what he is talking about. His parable about tearing down the temple and rebuilding it in 3 days. The disciples did not know the meaning until after the resurrection. This is when their eyes were open. All the gospels were written after the resurrection of Jesus, so by then they understood everything, but during the stories they did not. It is amazing when you see who Jesus is, God, your eyes are open and the entire Bible makes perfect sense.[/quote]
Sorry D that was not a rehtorical question. You said: “Just because he talks about it does not mean that it means literal, but could mean figuratively. Jesus uses Hyperbole all the time.”
You said today in one of your post that you weren’t certain if the creation and flood accounts
were true or allegory. You say that you’re a man of God and you believe in Jesus then why would not believe a direct quote Jesus made that references two earlier accounts in the Bible? Take the flood account for example. The flood account is way too specific for an allegorical moral story. No fictional moral story would give specific details such as the exact tree used to build the arc, how the arc was to be built, the exact size of the arc, the exact size of the windows on the arc and exactly how long it took for the flood waters to recede. A allegorical moral story would state: “Everyone was bad except Noah and his family so God told Noah to build a arc to survive a flood that was going to destroy all the bad people. Noah built the arc and his family survived the flood. So remember to be good like Noah.” At Matthew 24:36-39 when Jesus compares the time during his presence with the time before the flood, Jesus doesn’t say “rembember the Noah story.” Jesus gives details of how the people were living their life before the flood and parallels that with how people will live their life during Jesus’ presence. Again, too specific to be just a moral allegorical story.
D at no time did I pick and choose scriptures to fit my belief; you did that. When I explained a doctrine I did it thoroughly using many scriptures. When you explained a doctrine you used very little scriptures to do so. When you quoted scripture I used several scriptures to show that the scripture you quoted did not mean Jesus was God. For example, when you used John 10:30 where Jesus states that I and the father are one to prove that Jesus said he was God. I quoted John 17:20-24 where Jesus prays to his Father and ask him that he make ALL of his diciples ONE like he and is Father were ONE. So those verses clearly explain that ONE means united in mind and thought. On the other hand when I asked you to explain
1 Corinthians 15:24-28 which states that God subjected all things to Jesus except himself and that Jesus is going to subject himself to God all you could say was Jesus was being humble.
When I asked you to explain 1 Corinthians 11:3 where Paul states that the head of Jesus is God all you could say was Jesus was being humble. You said the same thing when I asked you to explain Matthew 23:20 where Jesus admitted to not having the authority to grant who will rule with Jesus in his kingdom but only his Father had the authority to grant this again you said Jesus was being humble. You didn’t use one scripture to back your explaination up.
I never said the parables were easy to understand for the people of that time. I said that they helped to paint a mental picture so the hearers could better grasp Jesus’ teaching. I used the wheat and the weeds illustration to show that Jesus had to later explain what each part of the illustration meant. So no not everyone grasped Jesus’ illustrations.
It’s amazing what one could learn once they learn what the Bible really teaches then the Bible will make perfect sense.[/quote]
I never have thought that the flood did not happen. My thoughts are on Adam and Eve, and if it is literal a day = 24 hours. I am on the fence on whether it is literal or alligorical. There is scientific evidence that the flood took place. The same evidence that a large asteroid hit the earth and put a layer of sediment over the entire Earth.
You are right you did not pick and chose your scriptures. You pick and choose which translation to use, and also change the translations to fit your beleifs or the beliefs of your leaders which ever it is you go to.
I beg to differ on your parables statement. In the Catholic thread you and Honest_Lifter mentioned that Jesus used parables so the common folk could understand. I think it was different. If it made it easy to understand he would not have had to pull the disciples to the side to explain it to them. They would have understood. Their eyes were not opened until he stood before them after the resurrection. Then they understood everything that Jesus had taught them.[/quote]
Diggity D. No, every single scripture I used could be found in any translation. Most of the scriptures I quoted were from translations that I don’t use.
At our world headquarters there is a big billboard that says: “Read God’s Word the Bible Daily.” We don’t rely only on our religious leaders to help us to understand the Bible. We are encouraged to read the Bible ourselves, make sure you understand the full context of a passage and look at different translations so you won’t be surprised when trying to explain bible doctrine from the Bible. Because of that I can and do thoroughly explain bible doctrine using many scriptures to base my belief on from different bible translations.
