Is the bible inerrant?

Faith & Science Conversation
688

That’s like asking why someone would want to apply what Chinese people believe about the world to writings by Chinese people. The Israelites were part of the ANE broader culture; indeed the majority of the Old Testament canon is all about how hard it was to drag them away from it – and that it never succeeded.
Ever ask why so many Jews expected Messiah to be a general who would drive out the Romans? That was what the ANE understood a Deliverer to be, and the children of Israel by the time of Christ were still stuck in the ANE worldview. Sure, they’d modified it somewhat, but their understanding of temple and priesthood and kingship and more were still primarily ANE; that’s why the disciples couldn’t grasp the notion that Jesus had to die – ANE thought had no room for a dying Messiah.

Besides which, that’s how you look at any human literature: from the point of view of the culture it comes from. Yes, the pieces of the opening of Genesis do a big smack-down on other gods, but they only have to do that because the Israelites had that ANE worldview.

It makes no sense not to do so! The whole Old Testament canon is about the struggle to get God’s people to think God’s way instead of the ANE way.
Consider Jereboam: when he led a rebellion and formed the northern kingdom, he had no problem at all getting the people to accept a new temple not authorized by Yahweh, along with a new priesthood! Instead they went right back to where they’d been so many centuries before, contributing gold to make a golden calf. That shows they’d made essentially zip progress in getting free from the ANE worldview! And how do you best communicate to someone – do you pound them over the head to teach them an entirely different worldview? No! – you talk to them in the terms of the worldview they already have or they’ll just decide you’re delusional and walk away (if you’re lucky; trying to teach a modern worldview in ancient Israel could easily have gotten you stoned on the spot).

Data – lots of data. We have (by the grace of God) so much of their ancient literature that a lot hasn’t even been translated yet (the same is true of biblical material, despite millions of dollars having been poured into trying to catch up – and ANE studies is not as well funded). We have treatises on the motion of the heavenly bodies, which were called that because they believed the stars were living beings who shone with light because they were heavenly. We have treatises on temples and temple rituals. We have treatises on kingship, both its source and nature. We have literature from them in more literary genres than most people could even imagine, describing everything from how to build a boat of reeds that could carry stone blocks for construction – including how the reeds must be cut and dried and bundled and covered with pitch in order to make the gods bless your boat – to how to deal with unruly teenagers, why lawyers were a pestilence on society, what curses to use against someone wealthier and what against someone of the same status and what against someone of lower status, and the reasons why and discussions of all sorts of incidentals. We have records of harvests and how grain must be stored so as not to offend the gods, records of battles that are exaggerated (which was expected), records detailing how many paces must be walked when backing away from the altar of a certain god. We have treatises on what the gods were like and how they expected humans to behave. We have treatises on slavery and taxation (slavery could be a form of taxation) and on how government should be run. I even recall an essay on how to placate both one’s neighbors and the gods in order to be sure your white laundry would turn out white!

Because the Old Testament scriptures tell us they did – repeatedly, loudly, and determinedly. If they hadn’t, kinds wouldn’t have had to keep cutting down Asherah poles and prophets wouldn’t have had to keep telling the people to stop with the Baal worship already (note that Baal was worshipped in the ANE from before Jacob et al went down to Egypt right up through the Exile).

Yet you demand it be read in a way that would have made no sense to most people throughout history (including when it was written) and would have been thought pointless if they could make sense of it. And you give no support from scripture for your view, BTW!

“Counter-intuitive” when by doing so we find that the Bible is far richer and more powerful literature than if we read it as something written by a friend’s great-grandfather in a journal of things he witnessed – an odd view, that. By the YEC view, the opening Creation account is almost meaningless theologically, but when we recognize the kinds of ancient literature that are employed there all in the one text and read it according to them theological meaning practically screams at us! As the one pastor said, reading Genesis literally the first Creation story doesn’t have enough to make one sermon, but reading it as the kind of ancient literature it is sermon after sermon comes out almost without trying.
BTW, how do we know what literary genres are being used? We know because the forms match those of contemporary ANE literature pretty much perfectly. That’s why we know that the first Creation account is both temple inauguration and ‘royal chronicle’ at the same time while being an edited version of the Egyptian creation story done so as to trash all the Egyptian gods by showing they were made as servants to YHWH-Elohim.

3 Likes
689

No --those are symptoms of the MSWV. At root, the MSWV holds that truth is what can be found by the scientific method and if something doesn’t fit what has been learned with that method then it is not true. That’s exactly the definition that YEC uses when it sees a globe in Genesis 1 and insists that Genesis 1 is about observed events.

And you quite conveniently – and falsely – categorize anyone who disagrees with you as a “Theistic Evolutionist” (as does Adam repeatedly despite the lies having been repeatedly pointed out).

Apply that first to the coteries of liars at AiG and other sites you love to reference. Then to yourself for passing on their lies.

This is the essence of the historical-grammatical method that most YECists claim to follow.

Almost unbelievably so!

As evidenced by the fact that there were those in medieval times who were certain that the scriptures supported the “science” of the time that everything is made of four elements, air, earth, fire, and water.

Absolutely.

And we would never know how potent the polemic in Genesis 1 is if someone hadn’t discovered the common ancient Egyptian creation story!

Poor example – the ANE worldview hadn’t changed that much. Where it had, Jesus applied second temple Judiasm thinking.

No, they aren’t, because what you claim about them does not fit the Hebrew. You pick and choose what to take literally, you put MSWV definitions into English words, you ignore common Hebrew grammar, all to achieve your reading of the text.

But YEC acts as though God is actually a demon, taking possession of the writers’ minds in order to get them to write in ways they know nothing of. It’s as though YEC thinks scripture was written in something like drug dreams, where they didn’t have any idea what they were writing even after they were done.

The scriptures are human literature. Inspiration does not overrule the human element; that is the demonic path, not divine. Indeed it is contrary to the nature of Christ to say it does, since Jesus didn’t take on specially modified human nature, He took on the human nature as found in a Jewish peasant girl. In inspiring the scriptures, the Holy Spirit would do no less than let the writers be their fully human selves and thus produce fully human literature – even though it was also literature with divine authority.

False. It is difficult to find any biblical scholar who would believe that – it’s the wrong kind of literature.

Also false. People down the centuries have read it as allegory or myth as often as as history. Scholars looking at Genesis 1 have found there only a mere instant of time, a thousand years, six thousand years, a million years, and an uncountable passage of time. Asserting that only one of these is acceptable, and doing so because that view fits with a MSWV, is arrogant.

The opening Creation account is about far more than that! Read as mere history it can be made to fit that, but it wasn’t written as mere history.

There you go again with the MSWV. Could you just for a moment let the Bible be what it is and not read modern scientific meaning into terms that can’t possibly mean that?

Scripture doesn’t blame sin for it when lions eat their prey, it credits God with it – calling it “good”. If the death of prey to feed a predator can be called “good” now, it has to qualify as “good” back in the beginning.

Adding to the text again: nowhere is the Creation called “perfect”.

In other words, you think that God forced ancient writers to us your modern scientific worldview.

I think that’s totally unsustainable. In fact it has been counted heresy at least twice in Christian history. You also don’t need to go that far to keep your privation view.

That doesn’t work with the Hebrew; ‘bara’ and ‘yatzar’ are used as synonyms too often to support such a distinction, and so is ‘asah’. ‘bara’ is used to mean “shape”, “form”, and “transform”. When used to mean “create” it is always used of God, but when used of God it can still indicate one of the above.

And this we ought to do since YEC drives so many away from Christ.

No, those accusations are made because what he states is what YECists do regularly, determinedly, along with bald-faced lies.
Examples of all of those have been given repeatedly on this board and in this thread, so don’t use the claim of ignorance of what is being referenced!

Oops – too late. You’ve been given clear examples, both when you force science into Hebrew words and when you add to the text by making it talk science.

Why you persist in using a source that has been shown to lie with abandon is beyond me. If a YECist told me the sun was shining outside I’d go check because the record shows they cannot be trusted.

Actually you’ve been making claims and not backing up any of it.

Flume tanks are a lousy way to demonstrate anything other than what can happen in a narrow channel when you set up the conditions right.

I’ve read it, as have others here, and it’s a good example of lying and misrepresenting – it averages almost one lie or misrepresentation per two paragraphs.
One of the big lies is that the layers in that image are something geologists didn’t expect, when in reality they’re exactly what was predicted for that type of eruption.

Also false. They just can’t stop lying.

In other words, he thinks that God deliberately set up the universe to fool us. It’s also just crap because there is no reason to believe that the behavior of photons depends on the direction taken WRT an observer; if light travel is instantaneous in one direction it is instantaneous in all directions – that is what we would expect from a Creator who can be called faithful.

That’s a load of deception, misrepresenting physics repeatedly.

But that’s an accurate description of the sources you keep recommending! Both of the articles I commented on use made-up science fiction to pretend that they know better than actual honest scientists.
That points to another reason YEC drives people away from Christ: it doesn’t take much actual scientific awareness to see the attempted manipulation of readers or audiences, and people with good sense react with, “Just how dumb do you think we are?”

The rocks in the Himalaya and Alps can be tested and analyzed and shown to be at a very minimum hundreds of thousands of years old. That has nothing to do with any worldview, it has to do with measurements made in the lab and compared with other measurements made in the lab. I’ve explained how that works often enough on this site; I’m not going into it again.

Fit quite well with an honest reading of Genesis.
You’re not talking about a “Biblical worldview” at all, you’re talking about the result of ignoring the text and forcing translations to fit a modern worldview that expects objective reporting and scientific accuracy. Which reminds me, have you found the places in scripture yet that tell us we should expect the Bible to do objective reporting and/or scientific accuracy?

2 Likes
690

I am truly sorry for the loss of life over there…very very sad.

In terms of animals travelling to higher ground, i do not agree with your claim there. Most animals have a far greater capacity to get to higher ground when compared with humans. In addition to that, not all animals would have necessarily travelled to higher ground…dead bodies float relatively quickly after death do they not?

I do not think there is any precedent that challenges the notion that flood waters transport sediment, rocks, buildings, dead bodies, trees…practically anything.

Lets also not forget, fossils found around the world are largely in sedimentary deposits and a major cause of these types of deposits is water. So theres that consistency with the biblical account.

I accept that YEC must take the biblical account with a normal reading and comprehension of language on faith…of that there is no doubt given the large amount of evidence that naturalism claims. However, there are many “still small voices” of evidence consistent the literal reading from the various bible writers who talk about the flood (and 6 day creation).

Even you would have to agree that there are some significant theological issues with TEism that are not reconcilable without re interpreting scripture or suggesting translations have been exposed to corruption over hundreds of years.

The corruption argument fails almost immediately because of Textus Receptus and the KJV bible. We all know and agree that the Textus receptus was passed on over many gerations without a central controlling authority (unlike the critical text). So, when bible verses in KJV, that talk about creation and the flood, are compared with the Critical Text (eg Codex Sinaticus), it becomes very obvous that Chinese Whispers have played no part in any change in the text…and that is because in these texts, they are the same.

691

Dear Adam,
I find myself in complete agreeance with what you have written here.

One of the most difficult to understand, compromising theological issues that Theistic Evolution has to contend with besides the damage done to the creation account by having millions of years of death and suffering prior to the the fall of Adam in the Garden of Eden, is that of the discrepancy that comes about with the clear and unambiguous fact that Jesus Himself taught that the flood was real, Genesis is real history and the flood destroyed all life on Earth except for those in the ark because of the iniquity that was rampant across the Earth at that time in history.

Why anyone would consider Jesus to be in error here is a mystery to me.

God bless,
jon

692

Dear Roymond,
are you talking about the modern scientific method that is firmly rooted in naturalistic philosophy that excludes God by decree. I would have thought that a genuine search for Truth would include every available possibility, but no, anything to do with God is strictly forbidden, even when God is the most sensible, logical conclusion a normal rational human being arrives at.

But all that aside, it is a fact is it not that the secular world and most of academia believe that, in broad terms,"nothing exploded and became everything (Big Bang) and then Chemical Evolution naturalistically created life (Abiogenesis), and then over billions upon billions of years of time and death, misery, and suffering, evolution increased that life from a single cell to the broad diversity of life on Earth.
Most of the secular people I know, or have met, or that I worked with, believe that to be the mainstream worldview!

And what do Theistic Evolutionists claim?
Well to be honest, I don’t know a lot about what Theistic Evolutionists believe except that as their name implies, they do believe the evolution mythology.

Thus, my point is very simple, I am regularly accused by you that I am forcing a modern scientific view onto Genesis, which is absolute nonsense!
The irony here is that is precisely what Theistic Evolutionists that ARE DOING by forcing a modern scientific view onto Genesis by claiming that evolution over millions or billions of years is real!

PLEASE!

As I said before, this is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black!

Accusing those Christians with whom you don’t agree, who trust the Bible translations we have, as doing precisely what Theistic Evolutionists are doing, (i.e., claiming the modern scientific view that evolution is real).
And then claiming that ALL the thousands upon thousands of intelligent and dedicated Bible translators throughout history ALL got it wrong, but you on the other hand are so very clever that you have translated the creation and flood accounts recorded in the Bible correctly, and amazingly, the translation interpretation you come up with is the PRECISE OPPOSITE of what the Scripture ever so clearly states and what those thousands upon thousands of intelligent, dedicated Bible translators throughout history ALL wrote that:

  • Adam and Eve are REAL PEOPLE.
  • Genesis is REAL HISTORY.
  • Adam rebelled against God and DEATH entered the creation through sin.
  • The FLOOD COVERED ALL THE EARTH, it was NOT a local flood, all nephesh chayyah life died except for those on board the massive ark.

You may obfuscate and accuse creationists of error etc, as you monotonously do at every opportunity, and you may fool some people, but I for one, am not deceived.

I trust Jesus and the thousands upon thousands of intelligent, dedicated Bible translators throughout history whose only agenda was to be accurate and faithful to the original Sacred Holy Scriptures.

God bless,
jon

693

John I agree with you largely however, I am going to come to St Roymond defense when considering your statements above. I do not agree entirely with the pot and kettle argument…its not really relevant to St Roymonds belief i dont think.

St Roymonds argument is one of biblical language translation and interpretation methods and whether or not we really know the traditions of the time and how language was therefore used. Words/phrases do not always mean what they once did (if i understand his belief adequitely).

His [St Roymonds] claim is not that naturalism and secularists dominate scientific knowledge thus refusing any theory that has even the remotest notion of deity but that modern human interpretation of the ancient “original” bible language is at fault.

His view focuses on the idea that if we consider different genre, then perhaps the original intentions of the writers of ancient scripture have been lost and therefore misrepresented and mistranslated into modern language/s. He claims that because many ancient languages have been lost to the ages. Even ancient greek is barely spoken in the modern age…the language is lost to the passage of time. This is true of ancient Egyptian as well.

I think St Roymonds argument there is a perfectly valid one that should be seriously considered on its own merits. I believe that there are some strong for and against arguments relevant to the notion of Genre and failure to accurately copy Gods Word throughout the ages.

I am obviously versed on the failures in the Genre arugment so ill post those here.

Evidences against St Roymonds Genre argument:

  1. There are a number of biblical writers, across different regions, different times in history, and whom used different scribes who all say exactly the same about Noahs flood. These are Moses (Genesis 1 & 2), Moses again (Exodus 20:8-11), Christ (Matthew 24), Peter (2 Pet 2). If the Genre argument is true, then which Genre is the correct one…ancient Egypt in 2000 BC, Christs time in Jerusalem in AD 27-30, or Peters sometime after Christs death and the end of the first century?
    This criticism is important because from the time of Moses writings to those of the apostle Peter is upwards of 1000 years…so Moses writings at the time of Peter were already ancient! They didnt even write using the same language (Aramaic was the language of the day in Peters time and a lot of the New Testament was recorded in Koni Greek.Koni Greek began around 300 BC. However this was most definately NOT the case in Moses time as he would have spoken ancient Hebrew, Midianite, or Egyptian given the Israelites had been in Egypt for 400 years prior to the Exodus). We should also remember that Moses left Egypt and spent 40 years in the land of Midian…so his Egyptian would have been terrible when he returned 4 decades later to speak with Pharoah!

  2. Bible history is recorded over a time period of at least 3 different languages about 1000 years, hundreds of km apart…and yet its words on the topic of the flood are the same despite these variables!

  3. Textus Receptus vs Critical Text in the above quoted passages are the same in these ancient manuscripts. One cannot claim Chinese whispers because textus receptus was faithfully copied by uneducated individuals with no central management and yet its the same when compared with Sinaticus for example. That completely demolishes any notion of corrupted manuscript writing…another issue would be, which scribe got it wrong…Moses scribe, Matthew (recording Christs words), or the apostle Peters scribe? Given we have 4 gospels surely if one got it wrong the others would have spoken out against the error…but they dont!

  4. Christ is, according to the vast majority of Christianity, the incarnate Son of God who was front and centre at the creation of the universe and the earth, front and centre at the time of Noahs flood, and is recorded as talking about Noahs flood during his own ministry! ( a statement in Christs own ministry that the Apostle Peter claims is where he got part of his own revelation concerning the flood from in 2 Peter 2!). If our creator doesnt even know His own universe and earth history one would have to seriously question the legitimacy of the gospel and salvation…they are clearly well fabricated fairytales!

  5. If God wasnt capable of conveying accurate world history to Moses…
    The problem there is that Moses was trained in the best institutions in Egypt. Given the entire Egyptian culture was clearly highly advanced in all manner of sciences in the day…this argument simply doesnt pass the comprehension stink test!

One last critisim i would like to mention at this point…

It seems to me that two resorts for TEists are:

  1. The OT Ten Commandments and sacrificial system are only applicable to the Israelites

  2. the idea that Christs death on the cross is not an atonement for the physical consequences of sin. The claim is that Romans 6:23 represents a spiritual death.

My Criticism of the above arguments are these…

Adam and Eve transgressed when they disobeyed in the garden of Eden. Satan also transgressed when he rebelled and was cast out of heaven. The events predate Isarelite nation by more than 2000 years! So the law being an Isarelite only statement is complete nonsense! Second, Christ died under the so called “Israelite law” and yet his atonement saves Gentiles from the consequences of those same laws!!!

Next…“If the wages of sin is spiritual only death” how is it that the Old Testament Sanctuary Service was clearly a physical sacrifical system and Christs fulfillment of OT Sanctuary prophecy was enacted in him being physcially tortured and died physically on the cross. He also rose physcially and ascended physically into heaven with the same body that doubting Thomas saw in the upper room a few days after Christs resurrection. Also, we know that Christ was also spiritually cut off from the father in the garden of Gethsamane.These two issues clearly falsify the spiritual only death argument in its entirety!

When one considers the consistency of the above biblical evidences (and they are biblical), one cannot but agree that the Genre argument has some serious deficiencies!

694

That is your invention. \it is not real. it is idealistic.

Tell that to the plants! Death is death.

So? Adam was the first human sinner (well Eve was but who’s counting)

Wrong sort of “death” He is talking about spiritual death as in

“leave the dead to bury their dead”.

Of course it was. Sin is disobedience to God not the Law.

In with Adam, out with Christ. That is all Paul is trying to say, but he is trying to be legalistically accurate so that there is no confusion. Well, that didn’t work!

No it is to misunderstand the word “death” (in this context)

That is neither stated or even assumed. Read it again!

That is not the God I worship! God did not curse humanity for one mistake just to sacrifice His son!

That is standard Christian dogma. However the only reason most people sin is because they make a mistake… It is not forces onto them. Paul had a view of slavery that is not accepted in this day and age. God does not do that.

Congratulations you have made the ultimate mixed metaphor.

Do you believe that? It doesn’t sound like you do!.

No, He won’t. He does not impose Himself on anyone, Christian or no.

And when it happens the world will change beyond recognition because this world, the one you are living in, cannot survive without physical death

The whole point of the apocalyptic writings is to show the compete change when Christ returns. Everyone will be happy, because they will have had a frontal lobotomy. They will be happy because God says so. For a lion to eat straw it will have to completely change its digestive system. it will no longer be a Lion.

Idealism has a price. And it is cognisance. Cognisance threw us out of Eden. Only if it is removed will we be able to get back in. I prefer this life with God’s forgiveness.

Richard

695

I was in Miami when we caught part of a hurricane that dumped over three inches of rain in an hour for an entire afternoon. It was coming down hard enough that streets with a 2% slope had several inches of water on them when the wind was blowing upslope, indeed hard enough no one with any sense even tried to venture out. I’d been out visiting some of the folks from church and got caught in the start of the deluge and knew there was no way I was making it back to my apartment. Fortunately a gas station owned by one of the church elders was both nearby and on relatively high ground, and my car had nearly-new tires so I still had traction. I spent the rest of the afternoon at that gas station! A couple of the teen guys from the church had taken refuge there as well; we helped the elder sandbag the doorways – our relatively high ground turned into an island as the storm totally overwhelmed the drain systems.
Without solid shelter surviving that storm would have not been happening.

People without experience in monsoon-type rainstorms don’t understand the power of all that water coming from the sky. Add in gusts strong enough to lift people off their feet and it’s beyond many people’s imagination.

1 Like
696

Or “Dusty”, as in “all we are is dust in the wind”.

Amen!

2 Likes
697

So your position is that all animals sin? That has to be the conclusion if you hold that cows and elk and crows and dolphins die due to sin. Or is your position that animals also are in God’s image and so Adam’s sin spread death to them as well?

What you ignore is that Paul is talking about people, humans – he says so repeatedly yet your “straightforward” reading of the text dodges his words in order to stick to your position . . . and a line with kinks in it from dodging isn’t straight, and thus the reading is not straightforward, in any sense.

The scriptures never say that death spread to all animals, they say that death spread to all men, i.e. humans

An odd claim since the scripture says that God providing prey to the predator is good. You can’t switch meanings of a word at your convenience – if it is good to provide animals for predators to eat now, it was good then.

And if it’s good, then how is it not normal?

3 Likes
698

Richard, i have not referenced any of what you have written prior to this, however, i did read your entire post.

In an earlier part of your response to Burrawong you link sin with God in a manner that is true but intentionally deficient to save face from the implications of the correct definition of sin…so ill fix that right now:

“sin is transgression of the law” 1 John 3:4

Its important that you correctly make that distinction. You are right that by association, the law is representative of God and his character. However, this is highly problematic for TEism as it also means that the law as known by humanity predates Sinai by 2000 years!

I agree with your statement above “that there will be a complete change…”, however that does not occur when Christ returns. The earth is cleansed by fire in the final judgement (Revelation 20:7-10) and the New heavens and New earth are created in Revelation 21. It seems to be more than a coincidence that the New Heavens and New earth are straight after fire in the book of Revelation…its pretty obvious what that means i think.

Im not sure what your point is about frontal labotomy…are you saying Christians who believe that a man, born of a virgin, who performed miracles such as turning water into wine by merely speaking words, who died on a cross and rose again exiting a tomb in a flash of light that blinded soldiers guarding it, rose into heaven 6 weeks later, and will come again in the sky i see out the window right now…

these individuals are not being scientific?

Your statement above concerning lions…let me get this straight, a lion is only a lion because its predatory? Isnt a lion a lion because:

Genesis 2:20 Christian Standard Bible
The man gave names to all the livestock, to the birds of the sky, and to every wild animal; but for the man no helper was found corresponding to him.

699

Thanks Adam,
again, I find myself in agreeance with all you have written.

And I must make one very important point that regretfully I didn’t include in my post you quoted.
It does appear to me that Roymond is sincere in what he believes, if nothing else he is certainly consistent with his beliefs about the translation, and he is correct that the intention of the author is a consideration.

That said, I’m sure the thousands upon thousands of dedicated, intelligent Bible translator’s took the intended meaning of the author into due consideration; they were not lazy, or uninformed, they were diligent and careful to be faithful and true to the Holy Scriptures.

Thus, I really cannot accept that those thousands upon thousands of dedicated, intelligent Bible translator’s did a sloppy job that resulted in Genesis being turned on its head with respect to the correct meaning.

It is also profitable to recognise that the claimed discrepancies,

… … …. BETWEEN

the myriad of translations of thousands of intelligent people that ALL agree:
a.) Adam and Eve were real people that,
b.) were directly physically created by God, i.e., they were the first humans who ever lived.
c.) Adam and Eve, disobeyed God in the Garden of Eden, for which,
d.) God cursed the creation from that point forward, and as a result,
e.) Death entered the creation for the first time; and about 1,500 years later, the,
f.) Flood covered ALL the land under heaven, (i.e., the whole Earth, it was a clearly Global event that catastrophically reshaped the entire surface of the planet from a single landmass surrounded by water to close to the continental configuration we see today), that ,*
g.) Extinguished by drowning ALL life on Earth, except for the life safely aboard the ark,

. . . . AND

the interpretation that Roymond claims is the correct one, that is quite different in many ways, that appears to accommodate in some of, if not all of the Theistic Evolution belief that other humans were alive before Adam and Eve, that physical mortal death is normal and not a result of Adam and Eves disobedience, and the flood was only a localised event that didn’t extinguish all ‘nephesh chayyah’ life outside the ark, nor did it reshape the Earth.
(Please, forgive me Roymond if I misunderstand any of what you believe the Scripture states.)

It is the sheer violence, that Roymond’s translation does to the Gospel message of the Salvation of Jesus, the Last Adam, and the wholly corrupted Theistic Evolution concept that physical death was present prior to Adam and Eve disobeying the clear command of the only Living God, (Who is perfectly Just and perfectly Righteous, thus intentional disobedience must have consequences), in the Garden of Eden, is what causes me to boldly state what I believe to be the Truth, i.e., the Bible’s we have all over the Earth right now are trustworthy and are correct.
They are not the inaccurate translations that some on this website would have us believe.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Matthew 5:18

God bless,
jon

1 Like
700

agreed Jon.

What i have to continue to remind myself is that whilst i do not agree with most of the individuals on these forums, they are some of the most wonderful Christians i think i have experienced given they are willing to even allow someone like myself to visit here, I have such different beliefs to them and lots of forums just ban people like me because i openly challenge their beliefs. What those forums do not understand is that they also challenge my beliefs…its a two way street, i regularly learn some fabulous stuff from these guys here.

Hopefully the middle ground is somewhere where, individuals who are not one side or the other here, may find solace.

Thank you for your insights btw i sincerely appreciate them as i do all of the guys who respond on these forums.

701

These are just your interpretations of a English translation and there are myriads of intelligent Christians that would not agree with that interpretation…

1 Like
702

Dear Bill,
thank you for your comment.

The difficulty I have in understanding why you believe that is because the Bible has been accurately translated many, many, many times, and in every in every translation that I have studied, Genesis is written as real history, not as allegory, or metaphor, or poetry, or prophecy; Genesis is clearly and unambiguously written as real history,and even more importantly, Jesus Himself confirms that.

God bless,
jon

1 Like
703

Yes, Amen to that Adam, and again I find myself in absolute agreeance with you!!!

Perhaps I come across a little too forthright, and I likely should be gentler in how I express the issues. I am always reminded of the old saying, “There but by the grace of God go I”.
It may be to some degree a product of the way we communicate here in Australia, not as an excuse but an explanation, though I am guilty of being too abrupt at times.

And the parable of Jesus that reminds us all and especially myself to first take the log out of our own eyes before we look for the speck in our brothers eye.

God bless,
jon

704

Dear Richard,
apologies, but I must disagree here, God’s sacred inspired Word, the Bible is ever so clear and unambiguous that death is an intruder, i.e., it is not the norm, nor was it the reality when God originally created everything that He made. There was no death before the curse that God put upon creation, that subjected the creation to futility, and causes it groan as the creation awaits the coming of the new Heavens and new Earth that will once again have no death, nor pain nor sorrow, for the former things will have have passed away.

Death relates to the animals in whose nostrils are the breath of life, nephesh chayyah creatures, it does not apply to plants as they are not nephesh chayyah creatures, they are plants that God gave as food for all. It is not complicated nor is it my idea, it is what the Bible ever so clearly tells us.

But Richard, please understand that Adam and Eve were husband and wife, before God they’re one flesh, indivisible.
As Adam was the first created and as Adam is the federal head of the family of man, and as Adam partook of the same sin as Eve, it is Adam that’s referred to, and as they are one before God, that includes Eve.

But Richard, I apologize, but here again Paul is referring to the physical death of our mortal bodies, from the wages of sin, Paul is not referring to the Second Death, that’s an entirely different matter altogether.
“Leave the dead to bury the dead,” well I may be wrong but what I have always understood that to mean is simply, that Jesus is basically saying don’t waste your time on the dead, but rather put your energy into spreading the good news to the living that are standing in the valley of decision, doing that is important, and will make a difference.

Apologies again, but don’t the Holy Scriptures clearly tell us that sin existed before the law was given but it is not imputed against a persons account when there is no law, however after the law sin reigns when someone breaks the law.

In the case of Adam in the Garden of Eden, God gave Adam a clear command, God’s command was to Adam as the law was to Moses.
All Adam had to do was to not disobey that one command of God and sin would have no legally binding hold on him and death would not have entered the creation at that time.

Adam broke the command of God, thus Adam sinned and as a consequence sin and its corollary death as the wages of sin, entered the creation from that point forward, and well before the formal law of the ten commandments were given.
My understanding is therefore that prior to Adam’s disobedience to God’s clear command, sin and death were not in the creation.

Apologies again Richard, but doesn’t the Holy Scripture plainly tell us:

“15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!”

What is written is abundantly clear here, we are justified by God’s infinite Grace of the free Gift of Salvation through faith in one man, Jesus Christ, the debt of death being fully paid by His precious blood, His substitutionary death on the cross for the sin that was brought into the creation by one man, i.e., Adam.
But death could not hold him who was blameless and He rose again from the dead! Hallelujah…

It is appointed for us all to die once, and then to give an account of ourselves before God, we are all guilty of separation from Him for eternity, and except for His Grace and Love toward us we would all perish, but His free offer of Salvation is open to all who believe in faith that He is Lord.

Richard, you need look no further than Job 1:1
“There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job; and that man was blameless, upright, fearing God and turning away from evil.”

… … … AND

“16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
20 And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:”

From the point that Adam sinned forward, the creation was fallen, all of the universe is groaning in anticipation of the new heavens and new Earth when the curse will be no more.

Of course God did not curse humanity.
Our Loving, Righteous Lord God cursed all of the creation and subjected it to futility when sin first entered His perfect creation through Adam’s disobedience and death entered through sin just as He told Adam, he would surely die if he disobeyed and ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. By disobeying God, he immediately knew good and evil.

“9 For the eagerly awaiting creation waits for the revealing of the sons and daughters of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only that, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons and daughters, the redemption of our body. 24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, through perseverance we wait eagerly for it.” Romans 8:9-25

But Richard, of course sin is not forced upon anyone, however people eventually sin, when they are of accountable age, I know I am not innocent, and the older I get, the more I recognise the iniquity that’s constantly waiting at the door for me to fall into, thus always be on your guard, and keep your eyes focused upon Him who can stop your feet from stumbling.
We all need forgiveness for our sins.

Sorry, I’m not sure what you are saying here.
However, it is self evident that everlasting life means death is no more.

Of course I believe that, what makes you think otherwise?

Well, God certainly does not impose Himself, however He does teach, reprove and correct with Love.
God is faithful and true answers prayer, not necessarily when I wanted, but in His good time, and I am forever grateful. He instructs us all through His Word of Truth and through the Holy Spirit.

Apologies again Richard, but that is plainly nonsense. Physical death is an intruder into the once perfect and very good creation, and when this present creation is consumed by fire and the new Heaven and new Earth are created, physical death will again be no more.

I don’t really understand where you are coming from here, it is a mystery to me why you say the things you say, but I will pray that our Loving Lord God will guide and lead you into all Truth.

God bless,
jon

705

I do not need that sort of prayer and object to the implications it involves

I am away from my computer for a few days and the phone app does not easily quote

Suffice it to say you are claiming the definitive understanding of scripture. That is arrogant to say the least

Scripture works on many levels and you diminish it by taking as you do and insisting there can be no other view.

Richard

706

Dear Richard,
you seriously misunderstand me.

Please, know that I do not see myself any better than you or anyone else, indeed I see myself as the least, and I know I have many faults, that is simply a fact.

I apologise unreservedly, if I have offended you, that certainly was not my intention, rather I was responding to the strange concepts and words you have used:

that, to be honest, I was and still am unable to properly understand why you have said what you have said, it just seemed logical to ask our Loving God to guide and lead you into all Truth.
I was not wanting to hurt or offend you, rather I wished to help you.

There is much power in prayer and God does answer prayer in His way and His good time.
I mean only good things for you.

God bless,
jon

707

Dear Roymond,
why do you so misrepresent what I have said, and make such strange statements here?

I may be wrong but I’ve always believed animals do not sin, as far as I know, they are innocent.

What we are ever so clearly told in the Holy Scriptures, is that the whole of creation is under a curse. The created perfect world was corrupted by Adam’s disobedience, even distant galaxies are affected by the curse on the creation from Adam’s sin.
Death came into the world through sin, that is death for man and animals, we are all born into a universe that is corrupted.

Doesn’t the Holy Scriptures clearly say:

" 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the eagerly awaiting creation waits for the revealing of the sons and daughters of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now."

You may find it profitable to read the excellent ‘Paper’ at:

A relevant excerpt from the abovementioned paper is below:
" The pervasive death that is found in the animal kingdom has come as a direct result of God’s curse resulting from Adam’s fall. As Barth has said about the animals, ‘Vanity is not the creature’s primal constitution.’58

Genesis 3:14 supports the assertion that the animals began to die after the fall, as God declares to the serpent: ‘… cursed are you above all cattle and above all wild animals’ (RSV). The contrast ‘above all’ communicates that the serpent’s curse would be greater than the curse of all other animals.
Hence, all animals are being cursed at this moment in time. There is nothing in the text of Genesis 1 that would lead one to believe the animals were experiencing death before God’s curse. The text of Genesis 1 indicates that the animals were not eating and killing each other prior to the fall of Adam.
‘**And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food. And it was so.’ Animals were originally designed to eat vegetation, not each other.

****Certain Old Testament prophetic texts that look forward to the apocalypse portray animals as being benevolent in the Messianic age, especially animals that today are considered dangerous and/or carnivorous.
For example, Isaiah 11:6–9: ‘The wolf will lie with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them. The cow will feed with the bear, their young will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like an ox. The infant will play near the hole of the cobra, and the young child will put his hand into the viper’s nest. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.’ (NIV)"

END OF EXCERPT FROM PAPER

And if death and suffering did not arise with Adam’s sin and the resulting curse, how can Jesus’ suffering and physical death pay the penalty for sin and give us eternal life, as the Bible clearly says, “22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.” 1 Corinthians 15:22

How then, can death be called:

“26 "The last enemy that will be abolished is death.” 1 Corinthians 15:26

if it were originally part of the “very good” creation?

31 And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. Genesis 1:31

23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gracious gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. "Romans 6:23

The Bible says “God is good” and in Genesis 1:31 God described his just-finished creation as “very good”. How do you understand the goodness of God if He used evolution, “nature red in tooth and claw”, to “create” everything?

You would do yourself an immense favour if you read the article at:

God bless,
jon

1 Like