Nice idea George, but just where do we learn that this is a parable. Jesus speaks as if it actually happened, doesn’t He? If not, how would He have spoken differently if indeed it did happen?
You assume that Jesus WANTED to speak in a way that was easy to understand. This is a typical Creationist position. But even the New Testament makes it clear that this is not so:
Mat 11:15 - - He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mat 13:9 - - Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mat 13:43 - - . . . Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mar 4:9 - - And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mar 4:23 - - If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
Mar 7:16 - - If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
Luk 8:8 - - And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Luk 14:35 - - It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Find your ears!
George
OK, George, did Jesus ever say this kind of thing when He was speaking about the historical record of the OT? Or was it mostly when he was speaking in parables? And much of when He was speaking to unbelievers?
You are right that there were times when He it seems He didn’t intend for EVERYONE listening to understand. But don’t forget, He would often then go on and explain the meaning of His parable to his disciples. So, it wasn’t that He didn’t intend for anyone anywhere understand. It was simply that at times, there were some people who He didn’t want to understand.
So, you claim to use context and interpret God’s Word in context, but when it comes to these statements, you just totally ignore the context and take these statements OUT of context and apply it to any Scripture anywhere that feel a need to re-interpret. This is not being a “workman who …correctly handles the word of truth.” in my view.
But let me get this straight. You actually think that when Jesus said “He who has ears, let him hear”, you think He meant that we were not to understand His references to Genesis in a literal way, but should understand that He was not really saying what He meant. Some would call that a lie, but that’s beside the point. But anyway, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” means, to you, that we can take anything Jesus said and hear it as we think it should be heard, assuming Jesus didn’t want the people back then to really understand what He was saying.
Oy veh!
Tokyo Guy,
While you and Young Earthers feverisly try to rationalize the words of the Bible to support an unrealistic view of the entire Universe … the position I hold is much simpler:
What does God’s Book of Nature tell us? Is the Earth billions of years old? The answer is YES - undeniably.
Is there any kind of animal where a human could live INSIDE … for 3 days (Jonah’s fish / whale)? The answer is NO. Even the largest whales have throat diameters that would only accommodate a basketball.
And once past the throat … where would the oxygen come from that would keep a prisoner human alive, in the fish’s gut, for almost half a week? There isn’t any. How would he survive the processes of digestion? He couldn’t.
IT’s A STORY. But what about Jesus referencing the STORY? He LOVED stories too. He did not present footnotes with his every discussion so that people would know what was and was not A STORY.
Did Jesus think his followers would hang on his every word… and accept what he said as irrevocably true regardless of how impossible it could be? Probably not.
Mr. Tokyo … do you think there were no rainbows after a rain until AFTER Noah’s Ark? The account of the creation of rainbows IS A STORY.
Until Evangelicals learn to ACCEPT that religion includes a a certain number of figurative stories … they are going to lose generations of young men and women who believe the witness of their eyes and ears is how God wanted them to perceive Truth … and how God makes the Universe and natural laws work.
George
Sorry to enter your discussion but could you tell me where Scripture reveals that it rained on Earth before The Flood
Tel… glad to have you in the “mix”.
So… there you are … trying to use the Old Testament as a manual of science. If Genesis doesn’t mention rain, it didn’t rain?
AnswersInGenesis provides a Creationist timeline for the flood:
Event/Person Passage Total Time from Creation (years)
God created everything. Genesis 1–2 0
Adam became the father of Seth at 130. Genesis 5:3 0 + 130 = 130
Seth became the father of Enosh at 105. Genesis 5:6 130 + 105 = 235
Enosh became the father of Kenan at 90. Genesis 5:9 235 + 90 = 325
Cainan became the father of Mahalalel at 70. Genesis 5:12 325 + 70 = 395
Mahalalel became the father of Jared at 65. Genesis 5:15 395 + 65 = 460
Jared became the father of Enoch at 162. Genesis 5:18 460 + 162 = 622
Enoch became the father of Methuselah at 65. Genesis 5:21 622 + 65 = 687
Methuselah became the father of Lamech at 187. Genesis 5:25 687 + 187 = 874
Lamech became the father of Noah at 182. Genesis 5:28 874 + 182 = 1056
The Flood started when Noah was 600. Genesis 7:6 1056 + 600 = 1656
Can you imagine an Earth atmosphere where it DIDNT rain for more than a thousand years? … ANYWHERE? There were no jungles before the flood?
Genesis says there are waters in heaven… above the firmament… which separated these waters from the waters below. So … there was certainly WATER up there, right ?? - - even if we accept the rationalization that it wasn’t stored there in liquid form.
But let’s assume it NEVER rained… this would mean that the only way a full earth of living creatures would be able to survive is for the atmosphere (at least the bottom-most layer) to be FULL of moisture, yes?
And it is this MOISTURE in the air, between our eyes and the sun (not actually rain) that is the source of rainbows, right?
Tel, please don’t be offended, but your need to be convinced that there was rain for more than 1,500 years pretty much assures all of us that you are unlikely to ever accept the BioLogos position. But perhaps you consider this a form of flattery. Pax vobiscum !!!
George
P.S. I like your note on your website:
“Whoever kills an innocent person it is as if he has killed all Humanity.” [Quran, from the book of “Surat L’maidah” (The Table Spread with Food), Chapter 5:32]
1 Like
As a philosophy professor of mine once said: The Bible does not say that before Noah’s flood that it did not rain. He was a liberal Protestant and believed that Jesus was lower than God the Father. He was an Arian. He and I agreed on two things: It rained before the flood, and God could have created things by Theistic Evolution. The fundamentalists in the class were the ones who said that it don’t rain before the flood. George, does your statement make you a fundamentalist? Patrick, I sent this to you because I thought you would find it amusing. Henry
tel, it doesn’t really say either way. Some creationists used to think that maybe it never rained before the flood, but the only thing we see in the Bible is that the Garden of Eden was watered from below. We are never told either that it did or did not rain before the flood. So it would be a bit presumptuous to be dogmatic about that.
Thanks for your views
This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.