Results 541 - 560 of 701
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Sir Pent Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
541 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19831 | ||
Clarification.................................. Dear Tim, I wish that I could explain better why the Genesis Creation is poetry. However, I am not anywhere near an expert on this subject. My only knowledge is based upon a lecture given many years ago by an Old Testament professor at a Christian college. He had many complicated reasons how it fit with an ancient form of poetry based on many things (not just the use of days). It was a completely foreign kind of poetry from what we use today (ie. it didn't rhyme, or even have a very good flow to it). The style was not as important as particular content that was required for it to qualify as poetry. My opinion was that it stunk, and I'd never write a love poem to my wife like that. But that's beside the point. Suffice it to say, that I respected this professor's knowledge of ancient languages and cultures, and have nothing to contradict his reasoning that the account was poetry. Yet at the same time, I disagree with his interpretation of much of pre-Abrahamic Genesis. He did not believe in a 6-day creation (or a worldwide flood for that matter). P.S. I'm sorry for picking the hardest example. I only choose the Genesis Creation, because, I know that there are some on this forum who interpret it figuratively while interpreting other passages literally. |
||||||
542 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19830 | ||
Contrary View, Logic ........................... Dear Steve, Of course you can join the discussion, you're always welcome. I admit that poetry does have the possibility of being literal (ie. Roses are red, violets are blue). However, it is quite often figurative (ie. My love is like a red, red, rose). Since the literal interpretation of the Genesis Creation doesn't make sense (to many people), and it is in the form of poetry, many people assume that it is the figurative kind of poetry. |
||||||
543 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19828 | ||
Clarification and Support ........................ Dear EdB, Thanks for your further thoughts on this idea, I think you have hit upon a great process. If I understand correctly, you are suggesting that all of scripture should be taken literally, unless it is plainly contradicted by another scripture. In those cases one must be interpreted figuratively. I really like this, because it goes along with two very important beliefs that I hold. The first is that the Bible is completely authoritative, and the second is that it was written and protected by God so that it could be understood by the common man. This process seems to me like it would be very consistent, and could be applied by anyone. One doesn't need a knowledge of ancient culture, so that they can recognize literature types or archaic figures of speech. They only need to read God's Word. Also it seems that everyone would be able to pretty simply decide between just two contradictory passages, which one was literal and which was figurative. Finally, I also like the idea that when in doubt, take it literally. Does anyone else have thoughts on this technique, or can anyone think of any times that this would not work? |
||||||
544 | Does it take away sins or not? | Lev 16:34 | Sir Pent | 19820 | ||
An admonition.................................... Dear Bill Mc, I was dissapointed by this post that you wrote. You have had many distinguished posts that I have read. Sometimes we agree, sometimes not, but you are usually respectful in what you write. However, in this post, I observe nothing but sarcasm. There is no answer given to the question, but instead just insults and condesention. I do not think that Steve was trying to disprove the New Testament. It seems like his motives were to find an explanation for an APPEARANT contradiction so that others would not be led astray by it. I think that is a great goal, and would hope that you would also see the value in it. I also hope that upon reflection on this post of yours that you would be able to see that it was unnecessarily negative, and find it in your heart to apologize. |
||||||
545 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19627 | ||
I agree that we probably could not come up with a method that would work 100 percent of the time. However, I think that a process that could tell 95 percent of the time would be good enough for me. I like your ideas of combining things, however, let's take a look at a specific example and see how it would apply. Genesis as a book would I guess fall under your category of Gospel (historical narrative), and therefore we would assume that it was literal unless noted otherwise. Then if we look at the Creation story, we discover that it is written in the form of ancient poetry, and doesn't make a lot of sense literally. It would seem that this method would tell us that it was meant to be figurative, yet you and I both believe it is literal. How do we reconcile this? |
||||||
546 | Bible and evolution both? | Gen 1:1 | Sir Pent | 19621 | ||
An attempt at moderation.......................... Dear Kalos and Steve, I am saddened at the direction that this thread is going. Number one, it has gotten off the original topic, and I would reccommend continuing this discussion on the thread regarding how Genesis could be figurative while other scripture references (ie. ressurection) are literal. Number two, it is unfortunate that you both seem to be offended by each other, when I think there is only a misunderstanding of each other. Steve is not actually saying that the Bible is true just because he believes it to be. Instead he is just trying to make the point that God, Himself is the center of his belief system. I think that you Kalos would actually agree with him on that point. Do you believe that God is true because a book (the Bible) says so, or do you believe the Bible is true because of the Truth of God? I think that is all Steve is trying to say here. At the same time, Steve, I would encourage you to be patient with Kalos. He (and I for that matter) have a very high view of the authority of scripture itself. During the short time that you've been here, it hasn't been made clear yet what your views on that are, and so Kalos is probably concerned about that. There have been other people who have challenged the truth of the entire Bible, and so many forum members are quick to defend it. |
||||||
547 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19616 | ||
Contrary View, Logic .......................... Dear Kalos, It seems like we are in disagreement so often on this forum, and yet I am confident that we are truly much closer to brothers than it would at first appear. I really like your quote about seeking the plain sense and avoiding nonsense. However, although that is a great summary statement, it does not actually answer the question at all. It is not objective to simply say intepret scripture using "common sense". The most obvious reason is that different people would tell you that "common sense" leads them to opposite interpretation of certain biblical passages. The only objective way to determine "common sense" would be to take a survey and if a certain percentage (ie. 75 percent) of the people agree on something then it would be "common sense". I am relatively certain that you would not recommend that we base our Biblical beliefs on just what the large majority says. Therefore, my question remains. What are OBJECTIVE and CONSISTENT methods for correct scripture interpretation? |
||||||
548 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19611 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture ......................... Dear EdB, Thanks for your response, but would you mind clarifying some of your ideas a little more. You said, "The Bible must be taken literally unless the text itself shows it is speaking figuratively by using metaphors, allegories and other such figures of speech." What is a consistent objective way to tell that? For instance you might suggest that anytime someone says, "such and such is LIKE", that it is metaphorical. Or you might know of a book of common figures of speech in ancient Hebrew or Greek. You also say, "Or unless a literal interpretation would violate common sense". I would submit that there are many Bible passages that violate common sense, yet I believe to be literal. Some examples are: the Creation story of making a person out of dirt, or Baalam's donkey talking, or Jesus being born of a virgin, or Jesus comming back to life after being dead for part of 3 days. As you can see, there needs to be a better method of determining the literal from the figurative. I appreciate your help in finding one. |
||||||
549 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19552 | ||
Summary of Previous Posts....................... From a search of previous threads, I have found only limited answers. The most common are: 1. The Holy Spirit will tell you. 2. Church leaders will tell you. Neither of these are very objective 3. Decide based on the type of literature. 4. Figures of Speech are obviously figurative. These can lead to problems. For example, the Creation story is written in the form of ancient poetry, and figures of speech vary between cultures. 5. Descriptions use "Phenomenal" language. (ie. the sun rises) 6. Parables, symbols, and "picture stories" are figurative. The problem here is, who decides whether something is one of these things. |
||||||
550 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19551 | ||
Duplicate post please disregard | ||||||
551 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19550 | ||
Dear Forum Members, An interesting question has arisen on the forum recently in multiple posts, which I would like to address directly. We would all agree that it is possible to interpret one part of scripture figuratively and another literally. The question is, "What are the criteria that can be consistently applied to tell the difference?" This is something that creeps into many different threads. It impacts how we interpret the creation story in Genesis, and the end of the world in Revelation. It even affects whether we believe that there was a certain number of soldiers, years, etc, or whether those numbers are figurative to mean something else. |
||||||
552 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19549 | ||
Dear Forum Members, An interesting question has arisen on the forum recently in multiple posts, which I would like to address directly. We would all agree that it is possible to interpret one part of scripture figuratively and another literally. The question is, "What are the criteria that can be consistently applied to tell the difference?" This is something that creeps into many different threads. It impacts how we interpret the creation story in Genesis, and the end of the world in Revelation. It even affects whether we believe that there was a certain number of soldiers, years, etc, or whether those numbers are figurative to mean something else. |
||||||
553 | Bible and evolution both? | Gen 1:1 | Sir Pent | 19507 | ||
Welcome to the Forum ............................. Dear Steve, I would like to interupt this discussion to let you know that I am glad that you have recently been sharing your ideas with this forum. I have been reading the posts on this topic, and you have caught a lot of heat so far. I would like to encourage you if I could. Although the majority of active members of this forum disagree with your interpretation of the Genesis creation; they will probably agree with you on most other beliefs that you hold. I mention this because I would hate for you to get the mistaken idea that you would never find common ground here and decide to leave. Dear everybody else involved in this thread, The original question of this thread was whether a person could be a Christian and believe in evolution? I personally believe in a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation. However, I can also see that it is possible for a person to disagree with me and still be a part of the family of God. I think that is really the point Steve is trying to make. In fact, I would point to Steve as being a good example. From the posts that he has made thus far, he appears to be a Christian. He recognizes his own sinfulness and need for God, and he accepts Jesus Christ as his Savior and Lord. At the same time he believes in evolution. Therefore, the answer to the original question is yes. Practically this entire thread since Steve responded has actually been on a related but different question. Can a person deny the literalness of the Genesis creation and yet maintain the literalness of other parts of the Bible (ie. the resurrection)? This is a very good question and should be a seperate thread. I have some ideas on that as well. However, it is not the point of this thread. |
||||||
554 | How do you know there is a God? | Ps 46:10 | Sir Pent | 19430 | ||
Different Perspective............................. Dear Maryann, I would like to share with you an idea which has been very helpful for me when it comes to your question. I would like to turn the question around and ask, "How do you know that there is not a God?" You see, it is really a yes or no question. Either God exists or He does not, and you are always going to believe one or the other. This way it is more clear that it is not a question of proving either one (which IMHO is impossible), but rather just figuring out which is more likely. |
||||||
555 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19222 | ||
Summary so far.................................... This is an update on the votes regarding three possible improvement ideas which we forum members could institue ourselves. I want to thank the people who have responded so far, and would encourage all of you who have not voted thus far to please share your ideas. I look forward to your help in continuing to make this forum as helpful as possible to all those who come here. Name,3 initial responses,Stay on topic,End with consensus Bill Mc,Yes,Yes,Yes Charis,Yes,Yes,Yes EdB,Yes,Yes,Yes Jensen,No,Yes, Reformer Joe, , ,No Sir Pent,Yes,Yes,Yes There,No,No,No Tim Moran,No,No,Yes Total Yes,4,5,5 Total No,3,2,2 |
||||||
556 | Is killing during war a sin? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18893 | ||
Please start a new thread......................... Dear Lionstrong and Steve, This looks like it could quickly turn into exactly what I have been talking about in some of my posts regarding forum improvements. The original question is by a person new to our forum, and regards killing in war. This is a subject that has already been discussed at length. However, if we're not careful, this thread could turn into a big discussion on whether the Israel of old is the Church of today. This is not only outside of the original question, it also could lead to a large number of posts that could confuse this newcomer to our forum. I would encourage both of you to consider starting a seperate thread to discuss your question, and give Los a chance to return and elaborate on his/her thoughts. |
||||||
557 | Did earth shake when satan was cast down | Is 24:20 | Sir Pent | 18826 | ||
This is kind of close................... Dear Darmstrn, the best thing that I could find was in Isaiah 24:1, 19-21. These verses definately are talking about God's wrath and judgement on the earth. They also describe the earth staggering. The only problem is that they don't specifically mention Satan being cast down. However, they do talk about God punishing the heavenly beings (of which Satan was one), and the method of this punishement (being cast down into hell) is talked about in other scripture passages. |
||||||
558 | Any changes? | 1 Corinthians | Sir Pent | 18822 | ||
Dear JMR, I also do not think that the answers should be any different. One of the great things about salvation is that we are forgiven from our past. Therefore, in God's eyes, whether you were virgins or not in the past is irrelevant. What is important is that in the present you live your lives according to His will, and that is to not have sex outside of marriage. My one question is, "Why are you waiting 3 years to get married?" I would imagine that after a year of be so initmately involved with each other, and having both come to the truth of Christianity together, that two people would be ready to commit to spend their lives together. Of course there could be extenuating circumstances, but I'm just curious. |
||||||
559 | Is killing during war a sin? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18820 | ||
Search Recommendation ............................ Welcome to the forum Los. You have asked a question which is both complicated, and yet very relevant to the current condition of our country and world. There have been at least a couple of threads in the past that have focused on this issue. I would recommend that you begin by reading through those, and then let us know if you have any further questions. Try doing a search in the top right corner of the screen for "called to never kill" to find a post of mine in one thread. Also search for "old new fundamental" to find a post of mine in a second thread. I hope that these will be helpful for you. |
||||||
560 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvement #1? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18605 | ||
Dear Nolan, Thank you for your further input on the idea of deleting duplicate posts on the forum. Let me try to take some of the things that you said one at a time. You said, "I completely support the 'filtering' of specific threads that are offensive or derogatory in nature, but should we really have the license to edit all threads just to make them more accessible or "look better"?" I completely agree about the filtering of offensive material. At the same time I would encourage you to rethink the benefit of editing threads for duplication. The purpose is not just aesthetic to "look better". Instead it is to help people who are searching for truth to be able to find as much information as possible from this forum. You said, "But just which posts should we decide to keep and which ones should we not keep?" I agree that there would need to be well-thought out guidlines to determine this, but I think a good starting place would be deleting the questions which all of us forum members easily recognize as being repeats. These are the questions that we simply respond by telling the person to do a search on certain words to find the original thread. You said, "If you are the "judge" of this, then does that mean that you will keep all of your particular postings on a subject and consider the postings of others as "expendable"? I do not believe that a single member of this Forum could or should accomplish such an objective task." I agree that it would be too large of a task for one person, but I think that it is deffinately not impossible to be objective. For instance, I just today replied to Prayon about Israel's actions deserving their slavery in Egypt. Afterwards, I realized that you had already replied to them with basically the same answer. In my thinking, my post should be deleted, because yours was first, and mine didn't add anything significant. Simply using chronology is an objective way to do it. You said, "Also, there are other problems like number of postings by users." I do not understand what the problem is there. It seems to me that the number of posts that a forum member has posted has very little relevancy. I do think that knowing whether a person has posted 1 time, 5 times or 100 times can be helpful. However, past that point, I can't think of any good purpose for keeping track of that information. Finally, you said, "Also, what if a completely new subject has spawned off the post or posts that were considered as "expendable"? Does this mean that other valid information concerning a different topic would also be lost?" I think this is a great point. It will be important to be very deliberate to not lose "valid information" during this process (if it ever happens to begin with). There are many threads that have gone in a completely different direction than they were originally intended. In these cases, there are multiple possibilities. Depending on what subject they are about, they could be added to the original thread on the same subject, or to another original thread which they more closely allign with, or to a completely new thread dedicated to that topic. In conclusion, I hope to have shown that although there are many details that would need to be worked out, I think there are answers for all of these very important questions. If this is something that the overall forum sees could be as helpful for enhancing the usefulness of this forum for building the kingdom of God, then it is worth working towards. That's why I started this vote, to see if it is even something that people want. If so then we'll work out the details. If not then I'll drop it and move on. So far the vote is 8 for, 6 against (4 of them just due to difficulty), and 1 undecided. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ] Next > Last [36] >> |