Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Christian Ecology | Gen 1:28 | Lionstrong | 63176 | ||
Gen. 1:28 And God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." My wife and I were talking this morning. Depressed with all the murder and mayhem she saw on the news yesterday, she asked, “What would we be doing if there had been no Fall?” My thoughts jumped to the verse above, and then as thoughts go, it jumped to other things. Subdue God says, subdue the earth, not destroy it. Christian ecology: Francis A. Schaeffer has an easy read on the subject, Pollution and the Death of Man: The Christian View of Ecology. I recommend it to you. Peace, |
||||||
2 | Christian Ecology | Gen 1:28 | Scribe | 63520 | ||
Fennis Dake made much about the word "replenish" insisting that the earth had been populated between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. I do not agree but why is the word Replenish used here if the world is new? | ||||||
3 | Christian Ecology | Gen 1:28 | Hank | 63526 | ||
If Fennis Dake had consulted his dictionary, he would have learned that the first definition of "replenish" is "to fill with persons and animals" and that the second definition is "to fill or build up again." [Merriam-Webster: Collegiate Dictionary] The KJV uses 'replenish' in Gen. 1:28 but modern versions generally use the word 'fill.' In today's usage, replenish, although still defined to mean both 'to fill' and 'to refill' is commonly used in the second sense, i.e., to refill; hence, modern translations, in an effort to avoid ambiguity avoid replenish, preferring instead the clearer and simpler word 'fill.' It's astounding how an outlandish theory of a pre-Adamic race hinges in large measure on the ignorance of the definition of the one word 'replenish.' But this is by no means the only far-out interpretative limb on which Dake ventures. --Hank | ||||||