Results 121 - 140 of 173
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Stultis the Fool Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
121 | 7 twenty-four hour periods? | Gen 1:5 | Stultis the Fool | 126747 | ||
Perhaps you are correct. Thank you for the input! Perhaps you would glean some information reading my post ID#126699 reproduced here. Follow the ID# to see the rest of the thread for context. "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." |
||||||
122 | why are discussions restricted | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126744 | ||
I see. Well, I suppose he should phrase his responses more adequately as to not cause folks to stumble. Thank you for the information. | ||||||
123 | Allegorical? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126743 | ||
Thank you for agreeing with me regarding these scriptures! | ||||||
124 | How do you explain? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126742 | ||
I agree that the spirit is to be our teacher. However, I am not trying to define the passages in Hebrews with a fleshly mind, nor am I trying to spiritualize them. I am not even trying to explain what the Author's intent is. My point is this: to demonstrate the use of allegory on the part of the Author of Hebrews in relation to "the creation" as in Genesis. I hope this helps you understand why I write what I write. | ||||||
125 | 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. |
||||||
126 | Things people THINK in the BIBLE but not | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126734 | ||
I will repeat another post: Genesis 4:7 reads: "If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it." Here we learn that sin was not in Cain, but, seeking to have him, crouched "at the door." Cain chose to open that door and allow sin to master him, instead of mastering sin. Jesus, on the other hand, chose to shut the door on sin, and thus mastered sin. We do not "sin because we are sinners." We are created "in the image of God." What is God's image? God is spirit [15:47]. We are sinners because we have sinned, not because someone else did: Ezekiel 18:18 "As for his father, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was not good among his people, behold, he will die for his iniquity. Ezek 18:19 "Yet you say, 'Why should the son not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity?' When the son has practiced justice and righteousness and has observed all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. Ezek 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself. We sin because we are tempted: James 1:14 and 15: "But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death." What you describe is akin to Paul in Romans chapter 7. This is a description of man in the flesh. We know from this chapter that the flesh is "weak," and James tells us it is prone to lusts. In the Psalm you quote, David is speaking of recieving life in his corruptable flesh. Christ came to us in the same corruptable flesh [Romans 8:3]. Allow me to reiterate Hebrews 4:15 "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." As in the examples above, we are not "born with sin." We are born with fleshly bodies, corruptible and given to lust, and sin seeks to have us all. As there is no one person that is righteous, no not one, we have all failed the test and fallen short of the mark ... until Christ, who, born in the same corruptible flesh did not allow sin to have him, but mastered it where we failed, and offered himself as the spotless lamb to be the propitiation for our sins. But he could not have done such a thing had he not put himself into the same image of man, tempted by the same lusts of the flesh, thus allowing him to sympathize and suffer as we do. |
||||||
127 | What then do we need to sin? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126733 | ||
Genesis 4:7 reads: "If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it." Here we learn that sin was not in Cain, but, seeking to have him, crouched "at the door." Cain chose to open that door and allow sin to master him, instead of mastering sin. Jesus, on the other hand, chose to shut the door on sin, and thus mastered sin. We do not "sin because we are sinners." We are created "in the image of God." What is God's image? God is spirit [15:47]. We are sinners because we have sinned, not because someone else did: Ezekiel 18:18 "As for his father, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was not good among his people, behold, he will die for his iniquity. Ezek 18:19 "Yet you say, 'Why should the son not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity?' When the son has practiced justice and righteousness and has observed all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. Ezek 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself. We sin because we are tempted: James 1:14 and 15: "But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death." What you describe is akin to Paul in Romans chapter 7. This is a description of man in the flesh. We know from this chapter that the flesh is "weak," and James tells us it is prone to lusts. In the Psalm you quote, David is speaking of recieving life in his corruptable flesh. Christ came to us in the same corruptable flesh [Romans 8:3]. Allow me to reiterate Hebrews 4:15 "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." As in the examples above, we are not "born with sin." We are born with fleshly bodies, corruptible and given to lust, and sin seeks to have us all. As there is no one person that is righteous, no not one, we have all failed the test and fallen short of the mark ... until Christ, who, born in the same corruptible flesh did not allow sin to have him, but mastered it where we failed, and offered himself as the spotless lamb to be the propitiation for our sins. But he could not have done such a thing had he not put himself into the same image of man, tempted by the same lusts of the flesh, thus allowing him to sympathize and suffer as we do. |
||||||
128 | Things people THINK in the BIBLE but not | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126714 | ||
According to the simple dynamics of what I see, if there was no "opportunity" to sin, then he wasn't really tempted. It's like tempting a eunich with female companionship, if you catch my drift. He has no need or desire for it, but a normal man does. How can we have a high priest that sympathizes with our weakness and has been tempted in all things as we are if he isn't subject to the same temptation in the same exact capacity? A person that has just eaten is not going to be tempted by food. A eunich, as stated before, can't be tempted by women. If he were not in a temptable state, then he can't sympathize with us. Nor can he choose to resist what is not, in truth, a genuine temptation. Therefore, if he is tempted, he has opportunity. At the moment of temptation, he chose to say no. Because of this, having been tempted of the devil, having resisted temptation, having declined to sin given opportunity and desire to do so, he kept himself separated from sin by not doing it. Now, your first paragraph, I'm wondering: Are you trying to suggest the age-old "Original Sin" concept? I hope this does not have to become a debatable subject, but I am strongly of the opinion that sin is something that has to be comitted. Scripture says that if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, but it also says that "all have sinned" and fallen short of the glory of God. You have to do sin to have sin. It's not automatic, else we will have to go back to the days of St. Augustine and start baptizing children so they won't go to hell if they die in infancy. |
||||||
129 | 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. |
||||||
130 | What then do we need to sin? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126708 | ||
You say I understand what "sin nature" is, and you agree that it gives Christ the capacity to sin, but you argue it is unnecesary to have a "sin nature" in order to sin. So, what then do we need to sin? | ||||||
131 | 7 twenty-four hour periods? | Gen 1:5 | Stultis the Fool | 126705 | ||
Yes or no, was the "world" created in seven twenty-four hour days, according to the description in Genesis chapter 1? |
||||||
132 | Things people THINK in the BIBLE but not | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126704 | ||
You wrote: "there was no sin nature in him" This, if I understand your statement, is incorrect. I agree that the Christ did not sin, but I argue that he had every opportunity to sin. That is why he endured temptation. If he could not choose to sin, there would be no temptation following his forty days fast in the wilderness, nor a temptation to flee his course when Peter (Satan) told him never to go to Jerusalem. If I misunderstand your statement, then I appologize. |
||||||
133 | Allegory? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126703 | ||
Yes, we will enter into "rest," as described by the author, but we will not enter "Today." Therefore, we must be "dilligent" to enter that rest [Hebrews 4:11]. This rest here refers to the Sabath Day, as spoken of in verses 9 and 10. At any rate, the use of the word "day" in Genesis is metaphoric, especially coupled with the concepts of "morning" and "evening." Additionaly, the author of Hebrew's tells us God completed his works from the "foundation of the world" [Hebrews 4:3], and we know the foundation of the world was created first of all things, along with the heavens. [Genesis 1:1] The passage explains that the world was "formless and void," thus the "foundation" upon which all else was built. Therefore, if all was finished from the "foundation" of the world, how is it that 6 more days of creation remain, unless there is allegory? We are all in agreement that God the Almighty can create the world in seven days, even 24 hour periods as defined in the modern sense. Is it also unreasonable to believe that all could be completed from the first day, in an instant, and the summation of his work bloomed over the next five days, in due course with his desire for creation? |
||||||
134 | How do you explain? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126699 | ||
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. |
||||||
135 | why are discussions restricted | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126692 | ||
I still don't understand what is in debate here... | ||||||
136 | Allegorical? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126690 | ||
So, use of the word "day" is simply an allegorical measure for the simplicity of our understanding, yes? This should be especially true considering the words you quote were written by Peter 1500 years later than those written by Moses in Genesis. | ||||||
137 | 7 days? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126677 | ||
Was the "world" created in seven twenty-four hour days, as described in Genesis chapter 1? | ||||||
138 | Do people disbelieve? | John 17:22 | Stultis the Fool | 126664 | ||
I am not entirely understanding the dilemma... God is Jesus. Do people on this forum disbelieve this thing? | ||||||
139 | Well done? | Bible general Archive 2 | Stultis the Fool | 126633 | ||
Well done? | ||||||
140 | Consequences of premarital sex? | 1 Cor 6:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126624 | ||
Interesting thoughts... interesting to see this opinion somewhere else. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [9] >> |