The idea has merit!
oh yes, you are the authoritative source on what the Bible says God was thinking.
That’s good as I never questioned your sanity only your morals and ethics.
That would be a waste of good leather for Biologos to send a KJV of the OT to Dawkins. He has already read the OT many times in preparation for writing “the God Delusion”. I think a better thing for Biologos to do would be to invite Richard to dinner like Biologos has done with others. I am sure Richard would gratuitously accept unlike Ken Ham. I am sure that there is much common ground to discuss in the area of science education between Biologos and the Richard Dawkins Society for Reason and Science (RDSRS).
Many skim the Bible. Many take parts totally out of context. Many pose as Christians. For example, God never destroyed humanity in the flood; He saved humanity. Good posts by the way
Please tell me how killing millions but saving 8 constitutes benevolence?
Maybe in newspeak?
1 Like
By saving humanity. God saved the only human beings on Earth. God waited an age before bringing the flood waters remember. God wanted to save many more but the Earth was populated by an evil that would make ISIS look like teddy bears. It is extremely hard to comprehend what the world was like, words could not describe it. It sickens the spirit to read this section of history, yet not in the way some would have it. Many prefer to be judge and jury and blame God as a mass murderer, because that’s the easy thing to do and it’s the lie Satan (the great deceiver) wants people to believe.
really? Why isn’t there any archaeological records of this evil? Or historical writings? It was supposedly only 4350 years ago and we have mountains of other ancient writings of other ancient near east cultures before and after that time. And what about the Aborigines of Australia and the Inuits of North America and the cultures of South America? Were they all wicked also? Enough to get wiped out in the most complete and thorough genocide in history.
No, the Noah story is totally inappropriate for young children and all the sugar coating that you and Eddie can come up with doesn’t change that.
There is no sugar coating it is just an historical fact. There was no genocide of the human race. The account of the Flood is of course inappropriate if told wrongly (which sadly is the case most of the time). You have to ask yourself two questions.
- Do you believe in God? If not, then why argue about a Flood? Everything would become academic because there would be a high chance you would deem all of this stuff as myth. Your mindset would be immovable, unless God called on you.
- If you do believe in God, then why talk in circles about archaeological records? And why dismiss the historical writings of the Bible?
The Bible is the oldest accurate testimony to historical fact in existence. 24 thousand ancient manuscripts, no ther historical data comes close. In this modern world we are subject to the grinding out of more and more propaganda over the issue that there is no God. Yet the most famous book we have to hand, the Bible gives us not only accurate historical accounts but also prophesy. The point is, the Bible has never been wrong, ever, in anything, so it is probably right about the here and now and right about what will happen in the future. And right about the Flood.
Often the Bible is tested, like recently as a team set out to discover if four anchors were in a bay in Malta from a shipwreck described in Acts 27-28. Sure enough, they were there and were recovered from a seabed of 90 feet in depth on a dangerous sandbar, just as declared in the Bible, as investigator Bob Cornuke said when he saw the anchors “My heart skipped a beat and I realised that I could be standing in the presence of Bible history”.
24% of verses in the Bible have a prediction about the future and there are a total of 735 different prophecies. 596 have already come literally true exactly as predicted (81%), so there is a good chance the remaining 19% will come to pass. And by the way, twenty more things have still to happen before Jesus returns.
It is impossible for the Bible to have been written without there being a God. The Bible is THE ONLY book that has been written that tells real history and forecasts real future events. It is the only book that when you are reading it, it will read you back!
The Bible is history His-Story, God’s story of planet Earth and His family. The Flood is a worldwide historic event and has been recorded as such. Whether you believe Scripture, hate it, think it is barbaric, love everything or believe it is rubbish, it doesn’t change the fact that when tested the Bible is always shown to be correct after all.
No. I argue that it is a terrible story to tell children even if it is fiction, with all evidence pointing to the story being a myth.
There is very little in the Bible that has been historically substantiated. Especially about a global flood 4350 years ago.
It’s not terrible it’s absolutely fantastic. You are still not getting that God saved humanity but hey-ho. And to say the biblical records have not been verified is just simply wrong.
Oh brother! What a low view of God’s Word. No wonder you believe in evolution! Jesus said “Thy word is truth.” He said every word - in fact every jot and tittle in the Word will come true. But you think you can pick and choose and still arrive at the message God is trying to communicate?
Hey, Tokyo Guy, glad to meet you. Let me ask you a question about ‘picking and choosing’ the words of God.
Why do you not take seriously the words of Jesus to the rich young man? He encouraged the man to give his wealth to “the poor” (probably a reference to an obligated brotherhood); he taught Christians to live in community with other Christians. Why do you not seek out a Christian community of brothers and sisters and exchange your treasure for the safety of your soul?
George
How could there be any archaeological records or historical records of it? It was all destroyed in the flood!
Was the whole world wicked? Read what God has to say in Genesis 6 for your answer. Why ask us? God knows best. We weren’t alive then.
Hi George,
Good question. As you know Jesus is a master teacher and He is able to read people’s hearts. He did
so here very accurately. Earlier in the passage Jesus said “Why do you call me good? Only God is good.” Now, is Jesus saying that he is not God here? Of course not. Context is the key. He is speaking to this man to get at the heart of his problem. He is pointing out his heart idol that is keeping him from salvation. He knew the young man did not view him as God and had a works oriented view of righteousness.
The young man needed to see that he was not able to keep all of God’s commands – that it was impossible to earn your way to heaven. The young man was kind of full of himself and actually thought he had kept all the commands. He seemed proud of his “self-righteousness” and this was Jesus’ way of
helping him to see his sin. Jesus never told others to go and sell everything they had and give to the poor in order to have treasure in heaven. I don’t know of anyone who takes these verses literally. So it is not a matter of picking and choosing, but of proper interpretation. People on this thread are talking about parts of the Bible not being true! That’s a whole different issue!
There was a time when Jesus said to hate your mother and father, but no one understands Him to be actually saying that we should hate them. The 10 commandments tell us to respect and obey them. So context is key. This a bit of a different issue from what I mentioned. Biologos rejects Adam in spite of the fact that no where is Scripture does anyone take Adam as a fictional being. The whole Bible views
the Adam and Eve account as literal, including Jesus Himself.
I’m not sure what you mean by saying that Jesus taught us to live in community. He commanded us to go into the whole world and preach the gospel. He obviously believed that everyone everywhere needed to hear the truth of the good news He came to preach. He told us to be His witnesses and to be in the world, but not of it. “As the Father has sent me, so send I you.” He sent us out as His representatives, as sheep among wolves. And no where does the Bible teach that we can buy our own salvation.
So my point is that proper interpretation and actually rejecting the historical record as false are two very different things. I do not claim to be perfect. I’m sure you could find something and confront me and say “Why aren’t you doing this?” My failure or lack of obedience would still be a different issue from a total rejection of certain biblical historical events/teachings.
Tokyo Guy, your response reminds me of what a Rabbi might say to someone interested in Messianic Judaism… or what an Anglican might say to an American Baptist … or what an Evangelical might say to a Christian Scientist.
If you think spoke the Greek to the Greek writers of the New Testament, you have to wonder why God spoke the Greek differently to different people. There are some HUNDREDS of original Greek gospel texts that differ from each other. What to do? I think examining one’s heart is an excellent beginning. When I look in my heart, I challenge the ongoing validity of capital punishment for someone who works on the Sabbath. But that’s a rule not a ‘history’ … so let’s try something else…
I challenge the ongoing validity of the story about Jonah spending 3 days INSIDE A FISH … and lives to tell about it. This is a ‘story’. Is it true? Nothing in my heart or mind allows me to think it is. It’s a parable. When I read the ‘stories’ of Genesis, I see them as parables as well.
I think trying to design an economic and political system based on parables is unwise (affecting government spending on education and the sciences) - - probably even dangerous.
George
BioLogos doesn’t “reject Adam.” BioLogos promotes the harmony between mainstream science and faith. Here is the What We Believe statement. Different writers who contribute articles to BioLogos have different takes on how to interpret the account of Adam in the Bible. There is no “BioLogos view” on Adam, just an openness to conversation on how to reconcile the Genesis account with scientific discoveries in genetics and anthropology.
3 Likes
OK, thanks. Sorry for misstating their position. I have heard numerous Biologos people make such statements. For me the fact that they are even open to re-interpreting the clear teaching of Scripture because of what 21st century scientists say based on their materialistic interpretations of nature and the data we have is problem enough.
Jim
Well George, no one can make you think differently. You are free to your opinion. I simply disagree. There is nothing about these passages that would make anyone think they are parables. In fact Jesus refers to them as if they actually happened. Peter says that in the last days false teachers will come who deny the flood even happened. The global judgment of the flood is compared to the coming global judgment of all mankind when Jesus returns. So, I prefer to interpret the stories as historical since that is what Jesus and the other inspired biblical writers did.
Jesus compares his 3 days in the grave with Jonah’s 3 days in the belly of the fish. He gives no indication that this is a parable or made up story, as He normally did when He did actually speak in parables. I’m not responsible for how you interpret the text; you are. I prefer to stick with what Jesus says as opposed to lean on my own feelings of what could and could not have happened in the past.
The death penalty for breaking the Sabbath was written in the OT Mosaic Law and was intended to apply to the Jews in that OT period. However, Jesus came to fulfill the law and to set us free from the Law so those OT rules do not apply to us today. We don’t require people to get circumcised in order to become a Christian. We become Christians, not Jews.
blessings!
Jim
Tokyo Guy - - the reason Jesus mentions Jonah’s 3 days in the belly of the fish is because it was NOTORIOUS THEN as a parable of visiting the underworld… 3 days in the waters of the afterlife.
George
10 posts were split to a new topic: Evangelicals and others and their different approaches to the Bible and biblical authority