Which is where the scientific approach to life fails. Science has its limits as does human perception. Anyone relying solely on these two will never find true faith in God.
Richard
In addition to a talking snake you also have a person named Man, a person named Life Giver, a tree that bestows morality, a tree that bestows immortal life, and a special garden where a deity wanders about. To me, that reads like myth, especially when you consider when Genesis was written.
4 Likes
Interesting is that what Genesis relates was unusual and unique about the snake was its craftiness in comparison to other animals, not its oratory skills. The implication is that talking animals were common and expected, much like the talking fox in many fairy tales. That should be a tip off as to genre.
1 Like
Thatās why I have often mentioned Aesopās Fables. If your top takeaway from any of those fables is āWow, animals used to talk!!ā then you have failed to understand their purpose.
1 Like
Yes.
Faithful Christians throughout the centuries have approached the text in very different ways, with different goals and and come up with faithful, but different interpretations.
You might appreciate this article by John Walton about evaluating interpretations. Many times the question we should be asking is not āwhose interpretation is rightā but more on āwhy is this faithful interpretation preferable over another faithful interpretation?ā
āAdam and Eve is a story to teach theological truth about the human conditionā is a faithful interpretation.
āAdam and Eve is a narrative that describes real people and historical eventsā is a faithful interpretation too. Which one you prefer depends on a complicated interplay of your presuppositions about what Scripture is and does, your knowledge about the world and what you accept as factual from other areas like science and history, and specific faith commitments related to theological constructs like inerrancy, inspiration, original sin, the fall, and atonement.
5 Likes
This is a nonsense argument that equally applies to Hinduism, Confucianism, Zoroastrianism, etc. Also, Hebrew writing wasnāt yet invented at the supposed time of the Exodus (~1500 BC). It was āfaithfully recordedā for 500 years before Hebrew existed as a written language the same way indigenous Navajo religious beliefs were recorded in the absence of a written language ā by passing down stories of the ancestors.
It also makes me wonder: Did God write the 10 Commandments in Egyptian hieroglyphics, since Moses was educated in Egypt and the Hebrew alphabet didnāt yet exist? Naturally, for Moses to write the Pentateuch, it also wouldāve been written in hieroglyphics. I wonder when it was translated into Hebrew?
We can trace the lineage how? Educated guesses would place Abraham around 2500 BC, shortly after the invention of writing. Was his lineage written in Sumerian cuneiform and carried around on clay tablets for a thousand years? And the specific incidents from his life ā were those likewise written on clay and passed down for 1000 years? And what of the genealogies in early Genesis? By your own account, Adam and Eve were created 6000 years ago. Was their genealogy written down 3000 years before writing existed? Impossible. So how were the names of their descendants transmitted from generation to generation? Orally, by tradition? The history of writing alone disproves your thesis.
Most of the actual historical material begins with the narrative of Israelās monarchy. Coincidentally, thatās also about the time the Hebrew alphabet was invented.
Israelās prophets said their defeat and exile was a result of breaking Godās covenant. Thatās an interpretation of history, not a historical record. For a ānaturalā understanding of Israelās multiple invasions and defeats, all you have to do is look at a map of the ancient world. Israel was a small nation situated on a crossroads between multiple competing empires. It was a puppet, vassal state for most of its existence, tossed and turned by forces far beyond its control. Like any other small nation bordered by an empire.
Brother, I hate to tell you, but the cost of discipleship isnāt measured in terms of what one believes about the Bible. It costs me nothing to latch onto a bad idea. Thatās not spiritual greatness. Scripture itself disproves the idea. Go and read.
Yep. I used to teach this stuff to middle school special ed students, and they grasped the idea of genre much better than the literalists who insist anything and everything is history.
3 Likes
Richard, what you are saying simlpy ignores biblical texts that i just quoted.
I have just posted 4 texts that directly address your question.
The first two tell us God hardened pharaoahs heart!
The second two tell us not to harden our own hearts!
Again, your original statement to me is a chicken and the egg argument. Its both!
The idea that the new testament changed the sanctuary service is simply wrong. The sanctuary service always pointed humanity to how salvation actually works. Thats is its only function. The bible tells us, we are ānot saved by the blood of sheep and goatsā.
The problem with your reasoning here is that what you fail to consider (or accept) is that the law pre existed the fall of Adam and Eve. It is the standard by which Lucfier was cast out of heaven. One cannot have rebellion is one does not have a standard with which to rebell against!
You can attempt to apply moral reasoning to this all you like, the bible writers do not agree with you.
You do not understand the Old Testament Sanctuary. Christ wasnt the scapegoatā¦you have the wrong goat (there were two of them).
- During the Day of Atonement, Israelās sins are placed upon a second goat. The goat doesnāt dieāāitās sent away, carrying Israelās āgarbageā to a spiritual being only referred to as azazel. Azazel appears to be another name for the being referred to as Satan, the evil one, and the enemy throughout the story of the Bible.https://bibleproject.com/podcast/what-day-atonement/
that may be your interpretation, however, read 1 Samuel 15:22
Samuel said, āHas the Lord as great a delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obedience to the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed [is better] than the fat of rams.
You can explain away all you likeā¦the bible says what it says. You can reason according to your own efforts, up to you. I dont agree obviously, however, i dont know what God you worship, because it isnt the bible oneā¦you dont believe that the bible narrative really happened.
I mean lets face it, you really dont.
For instance:
- show me scientifically that Christ was born of a virgin!
- Show me scientifically a heard of pigs were taken over by demons and drowned themselves
- Show me scientifically that Christ was raised from the dead
- Show me scientifically that Christ ascended into heaven
You claim that you only believe the writings of the bible that are verified through observable/testable scienceā¦prove the above and prove your gospel.
What you ignore is that your claims that science says that creation was not in 6 days, that the flood did not happen, that Israel did not ever enter or leave Egypt, that Sodom and Gomorah never existed nor were they destroyed by fire and brimestone from heavenā¦Christ on earth is equal in terms of faith to those.
My charge to you is that you in fact believe that mankind will evolve its own salvationā¦that is where all of the above leads.
To me, that says that oneās actions (obedience) iare more important that going through the motions of religious ceremony (which could be said to be belief). I remember reading from a rabbi that one thing evangelicals get very wrong is the idea that to Old Testament Jews, that sacrifices were what purified them, whereas Jewish thought was that repentance came first, then sacrifices were made out of obedience followed out of reverence to God. So, it gets a little fuzzy. In any case, Samuel seems to be saying that giving sacrifices does little to nothing if oneās actions are contrary to the will of God.
2 Likes
So there ya go. I donāt believe the literal, historical truth of the Pentateuch, so I worship a different God. The good ole left foot of fellowship once again. For the record, following Jesus cost me a successful career and in the end has left me with a net worth less than zero. Thatās an actual, real cost. Not your pretend cost of believing YEC. Iāll be glad to stand next to you before Christās judgment seat if youāre up to it. Not that I expect to be first in line ā¦
This is a pack of lies. The mods can delete this if they want, but I never said anything remotely approaching any of this. Does lying about a fellow believer earn you extra crowns in heaven? Just asking.
I believe all those things by faith, not by science. None of those things are verifiable by evidence. On the other hand, we have mountains of evidence that creation wasnāt a six-day event, a global flood is impossible and never happened, there is no evidence for the Exodus, etc. To equate Christ with those events verges on blasphemy.
Iāll leave it there, and I promise Iāll never respond to your trash again.
3 Likes
Science is founded on objective observation. Life requires subjective participation. Thus a āscientific approach to lifeā is an outright lie or delusional.
Anyone pretending to anything other than human perception is also delusional.
Sounds circular to me.
I seriously doubt anyone finds a true faith in God by relying on anything else.
Of course, there is God, who teaches such a faith. But it would be very strange to say you are relying on God to find a true faith in God.
1 Like
To be very colloquial about it, the word could be translated āDirt Dudeā.
Not necessarily. The word can be translated as āshining oneā, which would be a reference to a heavenly being, which suggests that this was no ordinary snake.
1 Like
It wasnāt invented, it was adopted; what we have for the Hebrew alphabet is a variant of old Aramaic. The forms didnāt really settle down until the Exile (at the earliest). The proto-Canaanitic alphabet goes back far enough that it could have been in use at the time of Moses.
And arenāt honest enough to admit that by their approach, everything by Tom Clancy and John Grisham should be considered history.
1 Like
Thatās a nice bit of make-believe.
Also make-believe. Lucifer was cast out of heaven for rebelling; it had nothing to do with the Law.
LOL
Not even close to true. Rebellion is most often against a person or persons, not against any standard.
Christ is both goats: our sin was put on Him, and He atoned for us.
Not entirely; there is no evidence for the sort of exodus as portrayed in the old Ten Commandments movie is all.
2 Likes
I donāt think so. I guess I largely agree with Adam on this one, even if I donāt buy into the theology of Enoch (and Milton) as he does (with this angelic rebellion and war in heaven before the fall of man).
The difference between the lamb and the goat is that the goat is more willful. So we have the expression ālamb to the slaughterā because there is so little resistance in the lamb. Thus the difference in terms of sacrifice is that the lamb represents the willing offering and the goat not so willing.
Christ is the lamb because He was a willing offering. Sure I think it is because the people and their sinfulness which demanded it rather than God, and it was a crime and a murder, so Judas is not praised. But even if Jesus preferred a different outcome as suggested by His prayer in the garden, it doesnāt change the fact that he was willing to do whatever it took for our redemption.
Lucifer was the scapegoat. Like all scapegoats there was no willing offering, for the blame was laid on him by Adam and Eve, when it was clearly their responsibility to follow the instruction of God. So it is Lucifer not Jesus who is portrayed with goat-like features.
P.S. A look at Milton and his motivations for Paradise Lost is fascinating. Seems it had a lot to do with his support for overthrowing the king of England.
Frankly that is like saying lying is better than murder.
When God shares his feelings about offerings in Isaiah 1 there is nothing there about God wanting obedience. What He wants more than blood offerings, ceremonies, and solemn assemblies isā¦
cease to do evil,
17 learn to do good;
seek justice,
correct oppression;
defend the fatherless,
plead for the widow.
Obedience is a good first step. But that is the moral dilemma of a toddler! Godās REAL DREAM is of people who have the law of God written on their hearts. Doing good not out of obedience but because it is what they really WANT to do.
That is the teaching of Jesus. You seem to be stuck in the OT.
ā¦ and it aināt what you say!
I doubt you know what God you worship, because what you describe isnāt the one in the NT.
Talk about obedience! One of the commands is not to bear false witness as you have done here. Your preposterous conclusions about Jay313 do not equal a claim made by him. If I did that, I could say you have rejected the NT and only support the OT as true.
Your over the top reaction is saying we should throw out science and believe whatever the Bible says even if it says the earth rests on pillars and does not move.
Amen to that!
2 Likes
For Genesis 1-11 there is evidence from the applied sciences and other fields of studies that relate to the events. Evidence lends support to some and less to others but a lot is explainable by what the writers of Genesis did not know 2500 years ago. In addition the underlying messages of Godās love and judgement should not be overlooked.
1 Like
That was carved on a wooden beam over the entrance to the old Methodist church here, on the inside to be seen as people departed. It was lost when the church burned to the ground.
1 Like