YEC and other aberrations use science to hammer the scriptures into compliance with their views (however badly they may do so!). That’s not where science and scripture intersect; science cna help understand scripture. Here’s a superb example:
I wonder how common this knowledge was when Malachi spoke.
A nice story behind the link that made me think.
One part of the thinking is how literarily we should take the mental images told in the biblical scriptures?
Does the mental image of the purification of silver mean that God wants to put the believers in the hottest spots to melt (and suffer) until He sees His image in us?
Should we somehow act to get us to such situations?
There are guidelines about how the followers of Jesus will be persecuted, and how we should behave when we are in the middle of the fire and stress of being ‘tested’.
Yet, I do not think that the mental images should be taken literarily.
The mental images are used to tell a message. We should try to think what the actual message was and is, rather than taking the mental images too literarily. AFAIK, we are not made of metal.
It’s a nice exposition of that verse, but what would make it a whole lot better would be an actual demonstration of the process in practice. There are some photographs and pictures shown in the video, but they don’t really demonstrate the key points all that well.
As they say, “Show, don’t tell.”
The mental image of the purification of silver is used also elsewhere. It is usually connected to some specific advice or message, like in Proverbs 25:4-5 to how the king should act.
In Malachi 3, the mental image is used in the context of the coming of the Lord and what the Lord will do when he comes: He will purify the ‘sons of Levi’ so that they will serve as the Lord wants. The Lord is the actor in the message but I assume that the message was given in order that the receivers would turn from their wrong ways towards God; do what they should be doing according to what had been instructed/written, before the day of the Lord comes with all the consequences.
So, the purification of silver seems to be used merely to emphasize the actual message. The purification process itself is not the point in the message, just an aid that should help in getting the message understood. Some may get so excited about learning something new about a mental image or parable that it may even overshadow the key message.
That may apply to most of the mental images, parables, teaching stories etc. told in the biblical scriptures.
A normal reading of language makes it pretty obvious i think…one only need read…note the use of similies highlighted in bold.
This text very clearly is not literally saying they are made of silver…it uses simile
”For He will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap.
3 He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; he will purify the Levites and refine them like gold and silver.
If you think that Malachi 3 is anything like historical accounts for the flood and creation, thats absurd…its a prophesy concerning the judgement…as for creation and the flood, where are the keywords…fjgures of.speech that tell us the writer in those accounts is intending to be anything other than literal?
The text very obviously has absolutely nothing to do with science, Darwinian uniformatarianism, YEC, nor does science even explain what the text is about. The chapter tells us quite clearly what its about.
Trees with magical fruit (of two kinds and are called desirable)
A snake that talks (may have had legs)
A God that walks in the garden and His footsteps can be heard
Animals created from the ground and brought to the man
A woman made from a man’s side (better than saying rib)
Humans sewed fig leaves to make cloths (when did they learn to sew?)
God made cloths out of animal skins (when did God get hands?)
So in English, a normal reading of the text says this is a fairy tale, albeit one with a message.
Or wings. Judging from Egyptian artwork, we might be expected to view the serpent as originally winged.
Omg not a single example there is a literary technique of simile…every single statement you have highlighted is written using a.literal sense in the bible…please cite some examples in genesis chapters one and 2 that use the appropriate literary techniques that supoort your claim?
I agree with your other complaints amd i can add to them…
…a donkey talked in Numbers 22! Im supposing that no one here agrees that the prophet Balaam really existed or that God opened the mouth of the donkey such that it could talk? The bible actually says God opened the donkeys mouth so it could speak to balaam…also note, where does it say the Israelites came from in this text? (Out of Egypt)
God talking with Moses on the mountain never happened either because scientifically we know for a fact that spirits dont have the ability to pass wind through vocal chords which vibrate in order the make speech. This means God also couldnt have spoken literally with anyone either by himself or via the use of an angel…such as Gabriel…Gods only way is through dreams…nothing “face to face like friends do”.
If the only evidence God speaks to us is through dreams, how then do Christians know the difference? Clearly scientifically.spirits cant physically interract with anything, so how could Ananias and Saphira have both died the same way at Peters feet? He must have had them murdered and then a story made up that God struck them down for lying to the Holy Spirit and to God?
The second coming…cant happen because no one can be raised from real death, and certainly no one scientifically is capable of floating off into the air against gravity or surviving in a vacuum.
The inconsistencies caused by denying the creation and flood accounts as not being literal get far worse when we dive into later chapters of the bible…the whole thing becomes an unscientific, unbelievable fairytale…and yet people here believe that a real God exists and that He can do stuff…prove to me a spirit can scientifically do anything…lets make it easy, can you show me scientifically that a spirit can physically lift a rock? How can creation hear God command things into existence when spirits dont have vocal chords and rocks cant hear?
The point is this, either the Bible is real or it isnt. If one doesnt believe the start of the bible is real, then how can one possibly believe the ending of it is real?
One cant believe in a spirit doing stuff when spirits dont even have the scientific ability to talk or pickup rocks.
The nuclear forces we discovered in atoms prove that we must interract physically with an object in order to move it
We can blow air to move things because our diaphram muscles, at the behest of signals from our brain are sent hrough our nervous system, expand our lungs and then contract forcing air out of our mouths under high pressure… thus the moving air does work but its a physically driven event.
God has to be able to actually touch stuff, to talk, to use his diaphram, to strike down people dead…otherwise none of this bible story is anything more than mumbo jumbo…it becomes a hoax amd people on this forum are praying to a God they know scientifically cant exist.
We cant pick and choose the parts we want to believe just because its convenient…the story of our Creator isnt recordred that way…this is an historical writing…its clearly historical and that history points to a future vastly different from what we are living presently.
Right. And note that it doesn’t say that God or any other spiritual being opened the mouth of the serpent. According to Genesis, why does the serpent talk? “Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, ‘Did God say…’ ” The serpent talked because it was crafty!
According to Rev. 12:9, “The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world.” Note that this isn’t a simile but rather a metaphor or symbolism. The dragon and the serpent symbolize Satan, just as earlier in the book lampstands are symbols for churches (1:20). Revelation is full of this kind of imagery. The tree of life also reappears in it (22:2), this time growing on both sides of a river that has the water of life.
So Revelation and the Eden account use some of the same images. To get the message conveyed by the images, you need to take them as intended: as symbolic. Taking them literally destroys the symbolism, reducing churches to lampstands, Satan to a talking serpent and eternal life to a fruit tree on a river.
Sorry but every fairy tale I know was written using a literal sense. You know like “Little Red Riding Hood.” Literal does not mean historical.
I am not arguing literary techniques but what a literal reading of the text suggests. It certainly doesn’t suggest a modern, historical report of what happened.
The spirit refers to matter without mass. While science says that everything that physically exists in this universe has mass, well space itself doesn’t but we know it physically exists because its known and observed.
Ever heard of magnets?
If you don’t know that only human were given the ability to speak in tongues, or communicate using the spoken word then you probably believe that primates can speak.
If a lightning bolt can physically split a tree in half, then a spirit can not only lift a rock but can also throw it. In paranormal investigations this is called a poltergeist.
Correct. This also includes the mind/soul, energy, light, etc.
Not everything that is physical has mass. The physical is divided up into the material (with mass) and immaterial (without mass). I believe that everything that God created is physical but space is not physical.
– nothing (1099. בְּלִימָה belimah) – Nothing, without, emptiness; From bliy and mah; (as indef.) Nothing whatever – nothing.
Space is absolutely nothing… God just put space between things He created, or space is just ‘created’ by putting things in space, just like darkness is simply the absence of the light that He created. The only thing that exists outside of the physical is God Himself.
Anyone who has studied even a little theology could explain to you in just a few minutes what you have wrong there…you actually already answered it yourself…God wasnt the one who made the serpent talk in the garden of Eden…Lucifer (the devil) did that, hence the relationship between the deceiver and the serpent. (im a little insulted i have to explain such a simple and well known biblical theme and theology to someone who is supposed to be scientific and understand far more complex things than this).
Now as for the quote above…you fail to appreciate the pile of horseshit you have just dropped the entire Old Earth Christian movement into…
If Genesis creation and the fall are symbolic, then so is the notion of the saviour being crucified on the cross and ressurrected. We have absolutely zero external scientific evidence for the ressurrection and ascention of Christ!
So, what then becomes of the plan of salvation and redemption…the Second Coming? Its a symbolic “socratean fable” of morality…nothing more nothing less. That means that there is no God, we are praying to and paying offerings and tithes to a myth…this life of 3 score and 10 years is all we have…after that its kaput!
When Dr Kurt Wise went through his bible and started pulling out pages that dissagree with science, its pretty easy to appreciate that what was left of the Holy Book after he had finished was in tatters!
the point is, the bible statement there is a literal claim of the way in which the earth is contained within space…its not metaphorical…the earth really does hang on nothing in space as described. I dont mind that the bible may use metaphorical language even in literal history btw…i think that we have plenty of evidences for that notion…particularly in Psalms. Just because simile is used, it doesnt mean that the subject and/or outcome isnt real. So when we read Malachi chapter 3, simile is used a number of times, however, God is clearly telling us he will literally send Christ (twice), God will literally judge the unfaithful, God will make a distinction between those who stay true to Him and those who do not. The consequences for those who are not saved is a universal biblical theme…eternal physical and spiritual death. Romans tells us “for the wages of sin is death”.
I am not seeing any relationship between the self explanatory outcomes illustrated in Malachi Chapter 3 and science supposedly educating us about Salvation…im just not seeing any relationship there, i think this is a straw plucking exercise against YEC and the evidence provided is not relevant or supportive in this case.
I dont think a lightning bolt is a good example as ions a charged particles have mass and as such they do not fit with the notion of spirits…what i would have expected is simply “light”. We know that light does not contain mass, however, it can interact with gravity and perform work.
@St. Roymond,
Looks like this thread has become somebody’s favorite toilet.
False Dichotomy: Either every text is literal or everything is a fable.
Category Error: Genre conflation.
Slippery Slope Fallacy: Interpreting Genesis 1–3 symbolically does not force any non-delusional person to deny the cross and resurrection. History shows believers separating those issues.
Selective Literalism: If the serpent was literally Lucifer using ventriloquism, then somebody’s “literalism” is itself interpretive.
Agreed. This thread got off to a good start with an interesting discussion about how purifying silver works in practice and how this illustrates God’s dealings with us. It raised some good points both practical and spiritual.
Turning it into yet more bickering about young earth creationism has taken it completely off track.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.
