Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Things people THINK in the BIBLE but not | Bible general Archive 2 | BradK | 126707 | ||
Ancient, In regard to your question, I'll address two main points: 1. "So was he also formed in iniquity?" No. Scripture explicitly tells us in Hebrews 4:15 that "...we do not have a high priest(Jesus) who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." Christ was begotten, not created and is the Eternal Son of God. The point of Phillipians 2:5-11 is that Christ humbled Himself, becoming obedient to the point of death on a cross. This does not say or mean He gave up any of his Diety. God would not have exalted Him or given Him the name above all names if He were not God- equal with God. As Is. 42:8 says, "I will not give My glory to another". Who Christ is as to His Being and work is the most impotant question we must answer! 2. Paul was an apostle, called of God. Josephus was not. I don't know of any scripture that tells us that Paul "considered part of the creation philosophical"? If we don't understand the literal creation as God set forth in Genesis, then we fall prey to higher criticism- that being that God's Word is not really authoritative, etc. God was in the beginning and created the heavens and earth (Gen. 1:1) Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
2 | Things people THINK in the BIBLE but not | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126710 | ||
It is hermenueticaly sound to compare Paul (a first century Pharisee living in Jerusalem with other Pharisees) with Josephus (a first century Pharisee living in Jerusalem with other Pharisees). Also, I aknowledge that if we don't understand "the literal creation," then we are lost without a foundation. However, the "litteral creation," as written by Moses, is viewed as alegorical by at least 2 direct sources, including the Author of Hebrews, and the historian and hebrew pharisee Josephus. It is also completely unreasonable to deny that appart from understanding of "the literal creation," that there is possibility of allegory designed specifically (and all scripture is "inspired") for our understanding. |
||||||
3 | Things people THINK in the BIBLE but not | Bible general Archive 2 | BradK | 126715 | ||
Stultis, I'm not exactly following your thoughts on this. First, why is it "hermenueticaly sound to compare Paul with Josephus? Second, where does the writer of Hebrews view the literal creation as allegorical? I do not think it "completely unreasonable".. that there is possibility of allegory designed specifically for our understanding. The section of scripture we're referring to is not allegorical and any attempt to render it so is outside of sound principles of Biblical interpretation. We can allegorize anything to death, and any approach to scripture needs to be careful to determine if that (allegorical) interpretation is intended by the writer. In the case of Genesis, it is clearly not historically or otherwise been understood apart from the literal. Josephus was not a believer or an apostle, so I wouldn't expect his view of Genesis to coincide with that of the historical Christian Church. His value is more of an eyewitness and historian than a biblical scholar. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
4 | Things people THINK in the BIBLE but not | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126738 | ||
I will reply as follows: Josephus confesses Jesus as the Messiah. See pp. 480 "The Works of Josephus, Complete and Unabridged, New Updated Edition, Translated by William Whiston" Published by Hendrickson Publishers, 1987 (I hope I have provided adequate bibliographical notation, apologies if "no") Esp. The Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3. "... He was the Christ ..." Do you understand "hermenuetics" by definition? I don't mean to offend, but I would like to gather information to provide you with a better answer. Just to be brief, sound hermenuetics requires consideration of time period, circumstance, culture, etc. This is why I include pharisaic topical refference to Josephus. Furthermore, to demonstrate creation allegory in Hebrews, I will refer you to a post I have already made on the subject: "How then do you explain Paul's description of "Sabaths" or "Holy Days" in Colosians 2:16 and 17 when compared to the Author of Hebrews explanation of the creation of man and God's rest found in Hebrew's 3:5 through 4:11. Here (Hebrews) the author thoroughly explains that "God's rest", or the 7th day of creation, is something we strive to enter, and while it is "Today", which, by intent, we can surmise must refer to the 6th day, we should strive to enter "God's rest." Either the author is allegorizing the 7 days of creation, or else he is displaying quite literally that the 6th and 7th days of creation were no more 24 hour periods than the first 4 days. In either case, something is debunked here: 24 hour creaction period following day four OR allegory not being present in the creation. Again, I find Paul's refference to "shadows" lends great credance to this concept." I hope this helps you understand why I write what I write. |
||||||