The original language, Hebrew, has reshith which translates to simply beginning.
I never said YOU inferred your interpretation was the only true interpretation. I said your readers would infer this based on what you wrote. If I wanted to make an accusation against you I would have said (this is for illustration only) that you implied your interpretation was the only true interpretation. Understand the difference? Sorry but I do wordsmithing in my job and it is a hard habit to break.
Doesnât have to be a whole sentence. A single word counts if not normally written in all caps. Again you canât see the humor? And consulting the all knowing Wikipedia I find "Further online discussion in 1984 included comments such as âCapitalizing whole words gives the impression that youâre shoutingâ.
Actually, the Hebrew has bÉ- before reshith. This is where the âinâ shows up. In Hebrew, prepositions like this are written as prefixes attached to the noun, so they donât show up as separate words.
And thatâs what happens when someone who doesnât know the language uses an interlinear. It just had the Strongâs 7225 indication on the first word. Thanks for the correction.
Jesus spoke in a picture language allowing all listeners to extract meaning from it. As with any inspired work, there are three meanings to His stories - literal, moral and spiritual. Origen of Alexandria (185 - 254 AD) was the most enlightened and prolific biblical scholars and was an expert at extracting the moral and spiritual meanings for the Bible.
The spiritual meaning of Jesus telling the story of the Prodigal Son is telling the story of His younger brother, Lucifer, who took his inheritance and was cast out of Heaven for it. Jesus also says that the Prodigal Son will one day come to his senses and ask for Godâs forgiveness. It also tells us how Good the Father really is to accept His biggest disappointment home with a celebration.
What is evolution? It is a theory proposed to explain the nature of living organisms without the involvement of God or any supernatural intervention. To mingle this with Godâs creation by His word does not make any sense at all. As believers in christ, we are called to examine the mysteries of creative processes and not to intertwine the ungodly evolutionary theories with the wonders of creative processes
Madd, this is not close to being an accurate assessment. Darwin never set out to disprove Christianity prior to his research leading up to his Origin of the Species. Actually he waited for 23 years to publish his work because he was worried about the religious implications it carried. Certainly dysteleological (atheistic, purposeless) evolutionary theory is inconsistent with Christianity. But this view shouldnât be conflated with EC (evolutionary creationism) in which the amazing biodiversity of life on earth results from God-ordained evolutionary processes.