It’s New Age because it spiritualizes without reason.
I didn’t see any. Exegesis works with the text in its context; you ripped details from the text, mushed them together with other things, and imposed an entirely different worldview on the resultant mess.
And I understand “divine breath” to mean inspiration. I take “dust” (basically the stuff of the earth) to be the closest in their understanding to matter.
Without reason? How about it being a better explanation in answering questions like in the OP:
Because Adam and Eve are types, described in human terms but are not humans as we suppose. They are a personification of early life forms. Death and suffering entered the world when they left the Garden of Eden, when they left the plant kingdom and entered the animal kingdom. Animals move about, become territorial and end up killing each other. See Cain and Able ‘in the field’ as another type example.
Death and suffering for anything that has a brain and can feel pain. I’m thinking that God would not have allowed animal sacrifices if they were not an acceptable sin offering, dying in our place. I would agree we could exclude death of plants, as every green herb was always given for meat (Genesis 1:30). Also, the life is in the blood.
I’m beginning to see why Jesus didn’t openly explain parables to the masses.
Its not something that can be seen anyway. It had to be presented in terms they could understand and then later (for today) revealed in terms we can understand.
It’s a worse explanation because it imposes a modern worldview onto the text and thus leads away from the text. You don’t get a better explanation by bringing in things the writer wouldn’t have had in mind!
Where do you get that from the text?
Where in the text does it say that the Garden was “the plant kingdom”?
Where is that in the text?
It has nothing to do with parables, except insofar as people would have done the same thing you do: drag in your own ideas instead of paying attention to the words.
A modern world view is not imposing. We can certainly have a better explanation because the Holy Spirit who guided the writer in what he wrote certainly had foresight into our modern world view. Its written for all generations. The writer doesn’t need to have everything in mind when he is guided in his words.
Not from just a simple literal reading of it.
I do pay careful attention to the words and what they mean… see all the descriptions of the river names and locations. I’m not making stuff up but its the words that tell another story, painting another picture for this generation.
But I reject this reversal of the meaning (by changing it to “awakened within us”). “But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then the spiritual.” (1 Cor 15:46) However, it is the spiritual body which is dead from sin not the physical body, thus it is the spiritual body brought to life in the resurrection.
Only if later generations do their homework and endeavor to grasp the historical-grammatical context.
This is a magical view of inspiration. The original writer did not have his mind taken over so as to force his efforts to fit with every single worldview that would come down the line. Or do you think that the scripture simultaneously fits with there being just four elements, phlogiston, aether, etc.?
You’re making up connections that aren’t in the text and thus kiss what is actually there.
“Painting another picture for this generation” is an approach that has engendered false teaching down the centuries.
I fail to see how these are different.
It’s both – and both are physical, it’s just that the spiritual body is more than just physical, and that without a living spiritual body the this-world-mortal/material body cannot sustain itself.
If you claim your physical body is dead then your alteration of the meaning of these words have become way too fantasy land for me.
I also reject your attempt to reverse the meaning of what Paul wrote. Both are physical/bodily but both are not physical/natural. Two meanings of the word “physical” – one meaning applies to both (thus we call both “body” and say it is a bodily resurrection) and the other meaning does not.
1 Corinthians 15:35 But some one will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” 36 You foolish man! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body which is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain.
…
42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so are those who are of the dust; and as is the man of heaven, so are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. 50 I tell you this, brethren: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.
Your first paragraph shows you didn’t read my post, you just grabbed something out of context.
Your second paragraph basically repeats what I said.
Devine inspiration.
Sure it did… not by force. Yes, every single world view that was predominant at one point in time can fit with scripture. Show me where the Bible rejects four elements? How about a flat earth view? …or literal creation days, or geocentrism, or existence of other gods? Where does it reject an old earth or even evolution?
Not all are true but we are moving ever so much closer to the truth in understanding the world around us and our understanding of scripture is, or should be, moving with it. We don’t need to study the past to understand scripture.
If scripture can only be understood from the timeframe it was written in, then it is stuck in the past… it cant still be relevant and people will look for spirituality elsewhere… that’s really where ‘New Age’ comes from, from a lack of understanding.
False teachings contradict scripture, but I support scripture 100%
No, the spiritual body was not dead from sin but was dormant like a seed.
The seed (the spiritual body) is in the grain, but is not awakened, or comes to life until the physical body dies. But our physical body does not really need to die for us to be born of the Spirit, because Jesus died in our place.
Jesus is the first and the last.
That’s exactly what we need to study – and it’s what God has been dumping mountains of treasure on us to study, so fast we can’t even keep up with learning about the OT.
Your view is like saying let’s go visit this country – I’ll make one up… call it Omnuji, where they speak Omnujan – so we can understand it, but we’re not going to bother to learn Omnujan, study Omnujan customs or culture, or even use Omnuji money, we’ll just do what we like. It’s totally disrespectful to the people – and that applies to the OT scriptures as well, because the scriptures aren’t about science or history, they’re about people and God interacting with them, and those people are still alive, not where we can see them but they are, and the message was written to them, not to us.
Stuffing science in doesn’t add to the message, it destroys what is there.
Only if you are. It’s just like visiting a foreign country where you have friends: you learn their language, their customs, their idioms, their fashions, their stories. Reading the scriptures isn’t about studying some documents, it’s about meeting people we’re going to spend eternity with!
People look for spirituality elsewhere because it’s gotten baked out of the scriptures by ‘Enlightenment’ thinking and the resultant materialistic, scientific worldview. You don’t make ancient literature meaningful by tacking on pretty pieces that you think look nice, you make it meaningful by showing what it really said to people back then!
“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.