is the bible to be taken literally?

[DanielleR]

I have a question for all of the believers on the forum. This question isn't meant to spark debate and nobody has to provide any proof... I'm just genuinly curious.

Do you believe that the bible should be taken literally or figuratively? For example... do you believe that the world started with Adam and Eve or is that just symbolic for something? Do you believe that Jonah was really eaten by the whale or was that just a story told to get another point across?

I'd love to hear what everything thinks. Thanks!

[Dave Miller]

Whether fact or not, every word contains truth.

Fact and Truth meet in the life, death and resurrection
of Christ.

Dave

[smaller]

Our physical world is an allegory of the Spiritual realm.

This is a reverse of what most call a "literal" interpretation.

[Freak]

When reading the Scriptures use common sense, that's all.

[The Berean]

The Bible is a collection of 66 books. There are many types of literary styles, called genres, in the Bible. The Bible has historical narratives, poetry, parables, prophetic writngs, music, the Gospels, Epistles, etc.

So when reading a particular book you look for clues within the book to help you determine what kind of genre it is. It's not really a question of "literal" interpretation but of "plain" interpretation. What do the "clues" within he book point to? This is called Biblical interpretation or "hermeneutics".

As an example, I'll use the Book of Genesis. A simple reading of Genesis makes it obvious that it is written as a historical narrative. It was intended to be read as history. People who do not accept Genesis as a historical narrative do so, not on hermeneutical principles, but for other reasons. But that is another debate for another time...

[LightSon]

Ditto on the Berean.


I'd be curious to hear Dave expand on "Whether fact or not, every word contains truth."

Does the Word contain anything which is not truth? Some assert that scripture is true, yet dismiss Genesis as myth. If something is myth, we can't say it is true, can we?

[The Berean]

Originally posted by LightSon
Ditto on the Berean.


I'd be curious to hear Dave expand on "Whether fact or not, every word contains truth."

Does the Word contain anything which is not truth? Some assert that scripture is true, yet dismiss Genesis as myth. If something is myth, we can't say it is true, can we?

They would argue that while Genesis is not historically true but it is spirtually or metaphorically true. Kind of like the tale of the hare and the tortise. The tale is not historically true but there it contains truth about working at a steady but slower pace and not burning out in life or something like that.

I disagree with this position.

[smaller]

Peace All

Most of you know somewhat of my "terms" in understanding.

Jesus who is WORD ETERNAL can not by His Being speak too much in the "literal" world if at all.

Why?

His Word is TRUTH and TRUTH has NO ENDING.

That is why "He often spoke" in PARABLES. God even sent His Signs to His Son as A PARABLE of Greater Things.

Here is an interpretation using some of the understandings found in WORD to see the UNIVERSAL APPLICATION of both a physical (literal)and nonphysical (spiritual) event:

ONE MAN of Gadarenes possessed with demons and the TWO MEN of Gergesenes possessed with demons.

This account is written of by three writers in Matthew 8, Mark 5, and Luke 8.

On the surface this account may seem to be of two separate encounters, since there are TWO MEN residing in Gergesenes from Matthews account, and ONE MAN residing in Gadarenes from the Mark and Luke account. Two DIFFERENT locations. One man and two men.

So why did Matthew write that there were TWO MEN? And why did Matthew state that these same TWO MEN resided in Gergesenes? And why did Mark and Luke have only ONE MAN residing in Gadarenes? Many have speculated that it was two different accounts, but the similarities are easily recognizable as the same. The acts of the men/man. The herd of swine. The deliverance of the man.

This account is filled with many spiritual correlations such as him being in the graveyard, unsuccessful attempts of others to bind him with chains, cutting himself, crying out, etc. The PRIMARY TEACHING from the disciples become Apostles, the INSPIRED WRITERS, is that ONE of the TWO men was a stranger to Jesus Christ and that they BOTH RESIDED IN THE SAME FLESH! This is WHY Matthew called the man TWO men and also WHY he made the CONNECTION to Gergesenes!

The meaning of "Gergesenes" in Aramaic is "a stranger drawing near" and is connected to a root word, Girgasite meaning "dwelling on a clayey soil." So here we see the beauty of Aramaic meaning linked to root-word meaning played out in the reality of NAMES AND PLACES in the Bible.

The Girgasite "dweller on the clayey soil" is also the Gergesene "stranger drawing near" to the ONE MAN he possessed, and is CONSIDERED BY MATTHEW to be that SECOND MAN! A SECOND MAN with the FIRST MAN! The stranger is "legion" ("for we are many" is his statement.) It is that stranger who identified himself to Jesus, for the hearers' sakes. Jesus certainly knew in advance from being LED THERE and from the "preceeding signs" what was happening here with this ONE MAN/TWO MAN. It is quite the fascinating chain when all three accounts are linked together.

Anywhere you read of the Girgasites in the O.T. there are certain correlations that "could" be made. The text is PROGRESSIVELY COMPLEX and links to REALITY even in our present day societies.

The meaning of Gadarenes is "REWARD AT THE END." This is where ONE MAN dwelt...AT THE END, where the REWARD was... Where JESUS CHRIST had SEPARATED HIM from HIS SINNER, OR HIS SECOND MAN, OR HIS LEGION OF DEMONS!

Now when you read of "the stranger" you may know who Jesus is addressing. Now when you read Jesus berating the Pharisees and Saducees it was not the ONE MAN He was talking to, but the SECOND MEN. The SECOND MEN who were ATTACHED to the ONE MEN! The ONES He called "CHILDREN OF THE DEVIL" and moreso, the "stranger(s)" that ALSO resided in the clayey soils of those MEN called Pharisees and Saducees. It was to the "strangers" that Jesus proclaimed His indignation and damnation! It is ALWAYS SO with Jesus speaking condemnation! In DAMNATION Jesus speaks not to the the friend (all of mankind) but to the FOE (children of darkness who cannot be "materially" SEEN!) but are MANifested in "word and deed."

For those who love The Word may you find DEEP understandings and not be discouraged by SUPPOSEDLY WRONG accounts or with what appear to be "contradictions." Usually "behind" these "contradictions" there are great things hidden, especially for YOU who believe! The unbeliever is blinded by their "stranger" or their SECOND MEN.

These accounts can be understood in The Spirit, and The Spirit is Love. Love "encompasses" all things, LOVES all ONE MEN, and does not judge ANY ONE MEN! Love created the "second men" in order to demonstrate "eternal things" in contrast with temporary things.

The reward at the end is that all of us ONE MEN will be SEPARATED from our "strangers." Our SECOND MEN.

It is of the stranger that caused Paul to write "Nevertheless NOT I, but SIN that dwells IN ME.” As Paul wrote that EVIL was PRESENT with him also.

Saul changed to Paul was a picture of SEPARATIONS just as Cephas was changed to Peter. It is UPON THIS UNDERSTANDING that Jesus builds His Church! Both Saul and Cephas were MANipulated by their "elemental spirits." THEY were blinded to THIS PRESENT REALITY of SIN and EVIL present with them, as is the case with ALL people!

I know those who bicker and dispute and do not love ALL PEOPLE are writing from the "strangers seat." You, the ONE MAN have my love in understanding also, as we all seek the defeat of the stranger, the SIN, the EVIL present dwelling upon the clayey soils of our bodies by Jesus Christ, The Word of Truth.

The ONE MEN are Perfect and are MADE SO by Him, YES even from the beginning.

The strangers, SIN indwelling, EVIL present, are upon us ALL in the “mortal body” until the end of mortal life in this clayey flesh.

There is The Reward at the END that awaits us ALL!

Romans 6:7 “For he that is dead is freed from sin.”

If you can see this, FINE. If not

enjoy anyway!

smaller

[JackRUS]

Originally posted by DanielleR
I have a question for all of the believers on the forum. This question isn't meant to spark debate and nobody has to provide any proof... I'm just genuinly curious.

Do you believe that the bible should be taken literally or figuratively? For example... do you believe that the world started with Adam and Eve or is that just symbolic for something? Do you believe that Jonah was really eaten by the whale or was that just a story told to get another point across?

I'd love to hear what everything thinks. Thanks!

I would ask, Who would you say that Jesus Christ is? Is He God or is a huge liar? Mt. 16:14-15

Did Jesus believe in a literal Adam and Eve?

"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he
which made them at the beginning made them male and female," Mt. 19:4

Did Jesus believe in the story of Jonah?

"Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.
But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous
generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah:
For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and, behold, a greater than Jonah is here." Mt. 12:38-41

"A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah. And he left them, and departed." Mt. 16:4

Did Jesus believe in the flood of Noah?

"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark,
And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so
shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Mt. 24:37-39

Does it matter if we believe in a literal Adam?

If you don't believe in the fact of Adam's literal existence, then you can't believe in the Gospel that teaches imputed righteousness through Jesus Christ. (Rom. 4:5-9,17; 2 Cor. 5:21).

"But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
For since by man (Adam's sin imputed to all) came death, by man (Jesus Christ's death on the cross and Resurrection) came also the resurrection of the dead.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all (that are saved through Him; the context of chapter 15) be made alive." 1 Cor. 15:20-22

Does it matter if we believe that Jesus is God or not?

"I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye
believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins.
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before
Abraham was, I am." John 8:24,58 (Ex. 3:6,14)

BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS

The correct method of study is the historical, grammatical method of biblical interpretation. The words used in Scripture should be understood according to their normal usage in everyday language. Portions of Scripture should not be interpreted allegorically unless the passage itself clearly indicates allegorical meaning.

[Berean Todd]

There is some figurative speach in the Bible (Jesus' parables for just one example), but I think Berean stated the historic Christian point well, and it is one I wholeheartedly agree with.

[CrimsonHope]

I believe some parts need to be taken literally and some figuratively. About Adam, Eve, and Jonah, I believe its all literal.

[Nineveh]

What The Berean, LightSon, JackRUS, Berean Todd and OrthodoxLegion said :)

[CryTears]

Yes, I believe every single word.

One day I thought, if I am going to believe this book, I am going to have to believe everything in it, I am going to have to believe the Noah story. That was hard for me.
After I said, " okay I believe this book and God's message."
I read it with so much more understanding. It was as if I had a veil lifted off.

How happy I am now, because I can see what is happening in the world.
There are those who wish to get it documented either as history or fiction, then when we have strong hate crime laws they can include the bible under those laws.
If so, then the bible will be illegal.

[geralduk]

Originally posted by Dave Miller
Whether fact or not, every word contains truth.

Fact and Truth meet in the life, death and resurrection
of Christ.

Dave

If you was to look at the foundational parable "by which we can understand all parables"
You will find that the "WORD is a SEED"
A seed contains ALL that is nescersary to reproduce that from which it came from.
It has nothing that is NOT needed and it has nothing that that ISNT needed.
But ALL that it is has come forth from the fruit of the tree.
and every seed "bringeth forth fruit after its own kind"

Some believe the apendix is soemthing that is NOT needed by the body.
and the theoryof evolution gives the interelctual framework for that suposition.
Yet when you consider the FACT that God created the BODY and not men themselves.
Then you realy have to STOP and consider the truth of what doctors surmize about it.
I have no idea what it is for.
But then neither do the doctors.
are we then to dismiss it then just because we do not understand its purpose?
or the reality of its function?
It may turn out to be a VITAL part of the body.
Which though we may LIVE WITHOUT it .
yet suffer loss other than itself by its loss.

I hold God knows what He is doing andthoughtwe may not "see" a5t first what it is.
Nevertheless we should nopt so easyly dismiss that which we do not underdtand in the Word of God.
Now I find nowhere else inscripture God stating as FACT but not MEANING it as so.
It is not presented as a PARABLE nor as a "likeness"
But as FACT.
Perhaps more tellingly the Lord Himslef refered to both Adam and Eve as a FACT as to with JONAH.
Not as a 'symbol' or parable.
Science ("so called") is still just trying to catch up with scripture.
But even she with her 'blindness ' and limited vision has come to the conclusion that life started at ONE point.
Why then do we put so much faith in science but less in GOD?
Who knows the end fromn the beginning?
and whos 'vision' therefore is 'perfect.'

Every word 'CONTAINS'(?) truth?

Think about that.

The devil quoted then the 'truth' when he spoke the Lord in the wilderenss?
For did he not quote scripture?
and therefore according to your reasoning 'spoke the truth'?
Yet in truth CHANGED the truth into a lie by the OMMISION of scripture.
Even as he changed it with Eve when he ADDED to it .
For where as his 'VERSION' of scripture on the FACE OF IT looked andsounded right. yet it was sued to decive and to lead AWAY from the way and purpose of God as laid out in scripture.
Yet that HOLY SPIRIT that was IN Christ andwho had "driven/led" Him into the wilderness was and is the PLUMBLINE of scripture.
Which puts and KEEPS them in their order according to the mind of God and therefore GIVES IT STRAIGHT.
and where as the devils use of scripture was using grain of truth to decieve.
That which was written and inspired of the HOLY SPIRIT was the WHOLE truth and in the light of ALL the scriptures and so the devil was cheked and finaly rebuked by the whole council of God .

Therefore id 'argue' that we if not convinced or "fully assured" we should seek God for the wisdom and understanding as to ist truth or not.
For does God speak HALF TRUTHS?
Does He wrap up the truth in a LIE?
Or does He speak alwaysthe truth?
and given that men became blind as to the truth.
Gave them HIS Word that they might knowthier BEGINNING and thier END in Him?
and in knowing the tuth "be made free"

[King David]

Originally posted by DanielleR
I have a question for all of the believers on the forum. This question isn't meant to spark debate and nobody has to provide any proof... I'm just genuinly curious.

Do you believe that the bible should be taken literally or figuratively? For example... do you believe that the world started with Adam and Eve or is that just symbolic for something? Do you believe that Jonah was really eaten by the whale or was that just a story told to get another point across?

I'd love to hear what everything thinks. Thanks!


DanielleR,

I believe that most of the Bible was given and meant to be taken literally. For example, regarding Adam and Eve, I believe that they were literally the first humans (and once they partook of the forbidden fruit, which I believe was a literal act), they became the first mortals (or those who would die).

However, some aspects of the story of Adam and Eve I believe to be figurative. For example, the explanation that Adam was made of the "dust of the ground" I believe might be more understandably rendered as, he (Adam) was made of the elements of the earth, which we fully understand.

Also, Eve being made from Adam's rib, again, is a figurative expression. Some in my religion (LDS or "Mormon") have explained this scripture to mean that she (Eve) was not made of his skull, to rule over him; nor of his feet, to be trampled upon; but of his rib or side, expressing that she, though different, was esteemed equally in all respects to man by God (and man should also so treat her).

That we are made in the image and likeness of God, that Jesus' father was and is God the Father, that Jesus was born of a virgin, Mary, etc., these we (Latter-Day Saints or LDS) all take to be quite literal.

That we will have to stand at the judgement bar of God, that we all will be resurrected (our spirit and physical body being reunited, never to die or separate again), that we have the potentiality to become joint heirs with Christ of ALL that God hath, we believe to be quite literally.

We believe, as The Book of Mormon, and other (LDS) Restoration scriptures make clear, that MOST of what is in the Bible was meant to be understood literally -- though there are exceptions of things that are taken literally, that are meant figuratively or symbollically. Having the word of God from or through modern-day prophets and apostles, as many of the people of God enjoyed during portions of the first 4,000 years or so of human history upon the earth, helps me and others to know and understand which is which. And this, combined with the blessing of the Spirit of God, with which we believe we are granted, by the laying on of hands after due and proper authoritative baptism, both of our sins, and for admission into the Kingdom of God, which is Christ's church, give us a great advantage in being able to understand and discern in the scriptures which is which. For we fully believe, as the apostle Peter made clear--

...No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

(New Testament | 2 Peter 1:20)

In other words, the initial intended meaning is the ONLY meaning one can or should take from scripture.


--KING DAVID

[billwald]

" If something is myth, we can't say it is true, can we?"

Formally, "myth" means "creation story" or "story of beginnings." It does not imply true or false.

[billwald]

"I'd be curious to hear Dave expand on "Whether fact or not, every word contains truth." "

The sentence is imprecise. "Facts" are investigated by the "laws" of physics and possibly by historical investigations. "Truth" is a metaphysical concept that has nothing to do with facts. Facts = data. Unfortunatly, we use "true" as in "true or false," meaning "correct or incorrect data," interchangably with "Truth."

[Nineveh]

billwald,
Take it easy on me here, I'm a beginner in the "metaphysical concept" arena of thought. (servent101 told me so) So I will tell you right up front your perception and his perception of reality will probably agree, I'm a spaz. Now, with that out of the way, I hope to get "data" from you about a few questions, if you would be so inclined.

""Truth" is a metaphysical concept that has nothing to do with facts. Facts = data."

False facts and true facts? Isn't a false fact called a lie? If facts can be false, how do they attest to reality? Are the "laws" of physics "true"? Could the laws of physics produce "false" facts?

[jjjg]

How can you take Revelations literally?

[CrimsonHope]

Lol, my head is starting to hurt with that Niniveh.

[JackRUS]

Originally posted by jjjg
How can you take Revelations literally?

"Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of
the prophecy of this book.
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and
out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this
book." Rev. 22:7,18-19

John was merely recounting what he saw in heaven with his first century mindset. That doesn't mean that the book is a fable, or that the interpretation is wholly symbolic.

[Berean Todd]

Originally posted by jjjg
How can you take Revelations literally?

Oh my God! Someone who takes the Bible for truth?? Who'd of thunk it ...

[geralduk]

It is to be taken VERY seriosly.

[billwald]

"False facts and true facts? Isn't a false fact called a lie? If facts can be false, how do they attest to reality? Are the "laws" of physics "true"? Could the laws of physics produce "false" facts?"

I prefer correct or incorrect data, reserving true and false to metaphysics and mathematics. Better to restrict the use of "laws" to theology and the courts. Better to call scientific conclusions, "latest best guess." Sometimes the latest best guess turns out to be wrong - incorrect.

[Zakath]

I'll agree with Billwald, "false" is not a characteristic of the word "fact". A fact is something that exists, something that is a particular way. For instance, the statement "my keyboard is beige" is a fact.

If my keyboard were actually blue, then my statement would not be a fact.

[jjjg]

Jack, it was written in apocalyptic language. That alone proves it's symbolic.

[LightSon]

Originally posted by jjjg
Jack, it was written in apocalyptic language. That alone proves it's symbolic.

*** warning: This is just my opinion. Hopefully my opinion coincides with reality. ****

The book of The Revelation of Jesus Christ is true.
The book is apocalyptic. (Actually "revelation" is the translation of the greek word "apocalypse".

I disagree that apocalyptic language proves anything is symbolic.
Yet I allow that much in Revelation is symbolic.

Even a symbol, however, is a placeholder for something. Just because a word is a symbol, is no reason to dismiss the reference. Something is being referenced in Revelation which has, is or will happen.

For example:
Rev 12:7 references a "war in heaven". Is that a fact? Or rather "will" it become a fact? My response is "yes".
The verse also references a "dragon". Do I believe in literal dragons? No. Is "dragon" a symbol? Yes, I think it is a symbol for Satan. I believe there will be a literal war against a symbolic dragon. Now this might blow some away, but I am tentative enough about my conclusions to allow that the dragon reference is also literal. Perhaps Satan will manifest himself as a dragon in fact. I am dubious of that, but Revelation depicts some wild, wild stuff. I'm just trying to keep an open mind.

Ever seen Xmen? I suspect that all these "powers" being depicted in movies are a (Satanic) way of preparing the populace to accept revelation style wonders.

Get ready. It is going to be a wild ride.

[DanielleR]

Originally posted by LightSon
Ever seen Xmen? I suspect that all these "powers" being depicted in movies are a (Satanic) way of preparing the populace to accept to revelation style wonders.
So you're saying that you think xmen was created, in a way, to help us prepare for the upcoming horrors of the revelation? That's a very interesting philosophy.

[LightSon]

Originally posted by DanielleR
So you're saying that you think xmen was created, in a way, to help us prepare for the upcoming horrors of the revelation? That's a very interesting philosophy.

Yes. I said, "I suspect". This is pure conjecture on my part.
Just take a gander at the level of spiritism being depicted in movies, dramatic series (Buffy the vampire slayer, Charmed, etc), and even in "kids" cartoons. Make a list of the shows that are spiritually based.

Buffy isn't just slaying vampires anymore; these vampires are aligned in a spiritual underworld web. They pop-in and out just like Samatha Stevens used to. (I might have blurred some generalizations between Buffy and Charmed. I watched just one episode of Charmed recently as was really spooked. There is also a high level of sexual intrigue blended in. Just what I need!

Do I think Bewitched was a primer for our "programming". Technically I do think that. It was alot of fun and is generally considered harmless.

I used to watch XFiles a great deal. Often they would bring in, not just weird stuff, but spiritually "dark" wierd stuff. Satanic. That's what pushed us, as a family, to stop watching Xfiles.

I do find it compelling, but in a dark, satanic sort of way.

Still, that these shows are an orchestrated Satanic plot to program us is all extra-biblical conjecture on my part.

[DanielleR]

Okay. So you're saying that this is the work of the devil? If so... why would he want to prepare people for it? Wouldn't he be better off catching them off guard?

I know it's just your opinion, but I find it very interesting and would just like to know more. :)

[Ya'nar#1]

Every part of the Bible should be taken literally, except for those special parts of the Bible, like the books of Daniel and Revelation, which were revealed by God in figurative symbols, so that man would have to devote himself to searching out their truths, with the help of the Holy Spirit. Don't get me wrong. We need the help of the Holy Spirit to rightly understand nearly all scriptural texts. But we ESPECIALLY need Him when studying out these special texts.

No one will rightly be able to understand these difficult figurative texts unless they first are willing to submit themselves to God's truth--wherever that may take them. If they are open to understanding truth, then His Holy Spirit will be able to come in to their thoughts and direct them to greater truth.

It is for this reason that we have so many erroneous interpretations for Bible prophecy. One very popular one today is the pretribulation rapture: an invention by a spiritualist minister back in 1830 who gleaned this idea from a 15-year-old Scottish parishoner of his who dreamed she saw Christians ascending up into the sky. Since then, this idea has snowballed into hundreds of millions of people--and all based upon the dream of Mary MacDonald (I think this is her name). It is true God does give dreams to people -- but then, so does the devil. And the only way one can tell the difference, is whether there is some part of the dream that indicates it is from God. If we place ourselves under the constant watchcare of our heavenly Father, we don't have to be plagued by the devil's interference in our sleep.

Blessings!

--Ya'nar

[DanielleR]

Originally posted by Ya'nar#1
It is for this reason that we have so many erroneous interpretations for Bible prophecy. One very popular one today is the pretribulation rapture: an invention by a spiritualist minister back in 1830 who gleaned this idea from a 15-year-old Scottish parishoner of his who dreamed she saw Christians ascending up into the sky. Since then, this idea has snowballed into hundreds of millions of people--and all based upon the dream of Mary MacDonald (I think this is her name). It is true God does give dreams to people -- but then, so does the devil. And the only way one can tell the difference, is whether there is some part of the dream that indicates it is from God. If we place ourselves under the constant watchcare of our heavenly Father, we don't have to be plagued by the devil's interference in our sleep.


I'm confused. Are you saying that you don't believe the rapture will happen as most Christians believe it? Do you think it will happen at all? :confused:

[LightSon]

Originally posted by DanielleR
Okay. So you're saying that this is the work of the devil? If so... why would he want to prepare people for it? Wouldn't he be better off catching them off guard?

I know it's just your opinion, but I find it very interesting and would just like to know more. :)

My opinion is formed by considering a number of Biblical texts. And I probably picked up some opinions and conjectures from others along the way. I also hold to a particular eschatalogical model which molds my thinking. I'm a pre-millennial and pre-trib, if that means anything to you.

2 Thessalonians 2, gives some insight into the end times. The author states that "that day shall not come" except certain things occur first.

Verse 8 refers to "the Wicked" being revealed, whom incidentally "the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth." In anticipation of this, Satan is scheming. You wonder about his particular strategy, and well we should.

Verse 9: "Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders"

"all power and lying wonders". Hmmm, this bespeaks XMen type stuff to me.

God performs wonders. I think Satan, and his forces will likewise perform wonders in order to deceive and amass a following.

Revelation chapter 13 is worth a quick read on this topic. The unholy trinity are presented: the dragon (Satan) and his 2 beasts. If you read, notice the themes of worship, for which they seek, and the “great wonders” (Rev 13:13) they perform to that end. These wonders are done “in the sight of men”. Why”
Verse 14 “And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast”.

It is also important to note:
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Eph 6:12

So when I see “Satanic” looking devices in the world (or the media), my temptation is to connect the dots.

We might ask ourselves; what are these “wonders”? I don’t know. I’m just guessing. You may dismiss my conjectures without fear of reprisal.

[CryTears]

I agree. That is how I read it also.

[Stratnerd]

I think it becomes a question of epistemology - how do we know. If humans were incapable of producing trustworthy knowledge then we would probably need to set up a standard of knowledge exclusive of our methods of gaining knowledge - how's that for spin. In other words, can we trust things that we ourselves figure out? If we can, and the Bible is factual then there's no problem right? I mean if we actually investigate things like creation, Noah's flood, and the ability of a human to live in a fish or whale then we should come to the conclusion that these things are true. But we don't. Biblical literalists of course don't think so but not for scientific reasons as is demonstated by their own proclamations (see answersingenesis and see what the statement of faith says).

So then next question is "which one is right?". If you decide that the bible is Truth that means that we cannot trust our own senses and thoughts because the processes of logic and our senses do lead us to the conclusion that people cannot survive in the belly of a whale, the Earth isn't 6000 years old and there's no compelling body of evidence for a global flood.

Like Danielle said, I'm not here to provide evidence of this. I'll gladly debate evidence in the Origins thread.

[LightSon]

Originally posted by Stratnerd

I think it becomes a question of epistemology - how do we know. If humans were incapable of producing trustworthy knowledge then we would probably need to set up a standard of knowledge exclusive of our methods of gaining knowledge - how's that for spin. In other words, can we trust things that we ourselves figure out? If we can, and the Bible is factual then there's no problem right? I mean if we actually investigate things like creation, Noah's flood, and the ability of a human to live in a fish or whale then we should come to the conclusion that these things are true. But we don't. Biblical literalists of course don't think so but not for scientific reasons as is demonstated by their own proclamations (see answersingenesis and see what the statement of faith says).

So then next question is "which one is right?". If you decide that the bible is Truth that means that we cannot trust our own senses and thoughts because the processes of logic and our senses do lead us to the conclusion that people cannot survive in the belly of a whale, the Earth isn't 6000 years old and there's no compelling body of evidence for a global flood.

Like Danielle said, I'm not here to provide evidence of this. I'll gladly debate evidence in the Origins thread.
It is hard to argue with physical evidence. I would not advocate dismissing your senses and logic. But I would ask if it is reasonable that a God who could create matter and energy from nothing, would have the ability to operate in a manner counterintuitive to the established laws of science.

I have not decided if I believe that miracles are a function of setting aside the laws of physics or if miracles operate according to laws which we haven't had access to testing. If the former, then the laws of physics are mechanisms that God has arbitrarily established. Regardless, I accept all the recorded Biblical miracles as written. And I regard them as counterintuitive, which is to say that they will not be reasonable within the confines of the science that we know.

I acknowledge that you will not accept the following line of reasoning, but I regard life on Earth to be equally unreasonable. Close inspection of the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics require that we should not even be here.

Carl Sagan felt that the universe was likely “teeming with life”. Well, if macro-evolution is the norm, then he should be correct. As a Star Trek and sci-fi buff, I, like millions of others, have been brainwashed into accepting this as a given, that at some point in the future, our society and culture will meld with countless extra-terrestrial species….. And so, let us continue to wait for “first contact”. When the Vulcans beam down and greet us, then maybe I’ll start to question my position.

I reject maco-evolution; I think the evidence we do have has been used to draw some very wrong conclusions. I do not think the universe is teeming with life, but rather, I suspect that we are all alone down here on this tiny planet. The physical tolerances, both in our solar system, and at the molecular level, are so fine, that it is really unreasonable for life to exist at all. Yet here we are – a counterintuitive miracle.

I am continually amazed at the difference in theistic conclusions and atheistic conclusions when apprehending to sophisticated “natural” systems. For example, the more I read and understand about the intricacy of the human anatomy (& brain), the more I revel in and glorify a God who made me. I have no idea what the atheist thinks, but it tends to be colored in self-congratulations. “Praise be to man,” is his mantra. “Isn’t man wonderful?” Well “yes,” I would say, but not for anything man has done in and of himself, but for what man has done as a byproduct of being gifted with some uniquely divine creative and aesthetic qualities.

Likewise, the clockwork precision and organization of the universe is a creative statement. “The heavens declare the glory of God…,” says the Psalmist.

The universe declares the glory and power of God. The wonder of man is a testimony to God’s highest corporeal creation. When I hold a newborn baby in my arms, I have zero problem believing in the miraculous power of God. We were created for a wholesome and eternal purpose, a great deal more than the 70 years of toil and pain we can expect from a presumed anti-god evolutionary happenstance.

There once was a notable doubter who refused to believe that Jesus rose from the dead. He said, “Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.” (John chapter 20).

Thomas was like you. He made a choice to trust his senses and to hold out for some tangible (logical) evidence. The difference is that Thomas really wanted to believe, whereas most atheists and skeptics are looking for reasons to disbelieve.

And in case you haven’t considered “the rest of the story,” here it is:


26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

[Stratnerd]

thank you light son, I appreciate it when people take their time in responding to posts. I often don't but I try...

But I would ask if it is reasonable that a God who could create matter and energy from nothing, would have the ability to operate in a manner counterintuitive to the established laws of science. surely, that's how one defines the supernatural. the question is - when and where have such things taken place, specifically Genesis.

I accept all the recorded Biblical miracles as written. the question is why? why accept them up front and deny your senses, not when there's lack of evidence for an explanation but when logic reasons that an explanation exists?

Close inspection of the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics require that we should not even be here. I have probably thought more about the laws of thermodynamics than most humans.

Well, if macro-evolution is the norm there is no reason to believe that it is. i think life was the result of numerous contingencies... but so is a person winning the lottery. I won't assign probabilities because the probabilities cannot be calculated. we don't know how to assign the boundaries so they can't be calculated (so beware of people that offer this info).

I suspect that we are all alone down here on this tiny planet. me too.. or mostly alone... I don't think we have the data to say either way but that doesn't apply to this planet.

atheist thinks, but it tends to be colored in self congratulations. “Praise be to man,” is his mantra. no, quite the opposite.

Likewise, the clockwork precision and organization of the universe is a creative statement. “The heavens declare the glory of God…,” says the Psalmist. those are qualities we assign... I see a planet in which most of the species that ever lived are no more and more are being lost every day. how sad.

we can expect from a presumed anti-god evolutionary happenstance. some people, and some that are extremely good evolutionary biologist, see the glory of God in evolution just as you do with our brains as you noted above.

The difference is that Thomas really wanted to believe, whereas most atheists and skeptics are looking for reasons to disbelieve. no, I believe it is quite the opposite.

[King David]

Originally posted by LightSon

It is hard to argue with physical evidence. I would not advocate dismissing your senses and logic. But I would ask if it is reasonable that a God who could create matter and energy from nothing, would have the ability to operate in a manner counterintuitive to the established laws of science.

I have not decided if I believe that miracles are a function of setting aside the laws of physics or if miracles operate according to laws which we haven't had access to testing. If the former, then the laws of physics are mechanisms that God has arbitrarily established. Regardless, I accept all the recorded Biblical miracles as written. And I regard them as counterintuitive, which is to say that they will not be reasonable within the confines of the science that we know.

I acknowledge that you will not accept the following line of reasoning, but I regard life on Earth to be equally unreasonable. Close inspection of the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics require that we should not even be here.

Carl Sagan felt that the universe was likely “teeming with life”. Well, if macro-evolution is the norm, then he should be correct. As a Star Trek and sci-fi buff, I, like millions of others, have been brainwashed into accepting this as a given, that at some point in the future, our society and culture will meld with countless extra-terrestrial species….. And so, let us continue to wait for “first contact”. When the Vulcans beam down and greet us, then maybe I’ll start to question my position.

I reject maco-evolution; I think the evidence we do have has been used to draw some very wrong conclusions. I do not think the universe is teeming with life, but rather, I suspect that we are all alone down here on this tiny planet. The physical tolerances, both in our solar system, and at the molecular level, are so fine, that it is really unreasonable for life to exist at all. Yet here we are – a counterintuitive miracle.

I am continually amazed at the difference in theistic conclusions and atheistic conclusions when apprehending to sophisticated “natural” systems. For example, the more I read and understand about the intricacy of the human anatomy (& brain), the more I revel in and glorify a God who made me. I have no idea what the atheist thinks, but it tends to be colored in self-congratulations. “Praise be to man,” is his mantra. “Isn’t man wonderful?” Well “yes,” I would say, but not for anything man has done in and of himself, but for what man has done as a byproduct of being gifted with some uniquely divine creative and aesthetic qualities.

Likewise, the clockwork precision and organization of the universe is a creative statement. “The heavens declare the glory of God…,” says the Psalmist.

The universe declares the glory and power of God. The wonder of man is a testimony to God’s highest corporeal creation. When I hold a newborn baby in my arms, I have zero problem believing in the miraculous power of God. We were created for a wholesome and eternal purpose, a great deal more than the 70 years of toil and pain we can expect from a presumed anti-god evolutionary happenstance.

There once was a notable doubter who refused to believe that Jesus rose from the dead. He said, “Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.” (John chapter 20).

Thomas was like you. He made a choice to trust his senses and to hold out for some tangible (logical) evidence. The difference is that Thomas really wanted to believe, whereas most atheists and skeptics are looking for reasons to disbelieve.

And in case you haven’t considered “the rest of the story,” here it is:


26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

I disagree with LightSon on his first paragraph. The elements (matter) are eternal. To "create" does not mean to make from absolutely nothing.

However, astoundingly, I agree with most all or all of the rest that he says in his abovepost!


--KING DAVID

[add yasaf]

You should love this book - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0310431808/ref=pd_luc_mri/103-5375751-1737450?v=glance&s=books&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&st=*


It is a must for everyone interested in this question!

[King David]

Originally posted by add yasaf

You should love this book - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0310431808/ref=pd_luc_mri/103-5375751-1737450?v=glance&s=books&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&st=*


It is a must for everyone interested in this question!

Add Yasaf,

That 'exec' thing in the URL doesn't mean it's one of the worms or viruses going around, now, does it (before I look at it)?


--KING DAVID

[LightSon]

Originally posted by King David

I disagree with LightSon on his first paragraph. The elements (matter) are eternal. To "create" does not mean to make from absolutely nothing.


Folks of my ilk believe in "'Creation Ex Nilo," implying that at one point in eternity past, all that existed was God, and that He brought matter into being from nothing. KD is being consistent with his theology in alluding to the concept of "LDS science". I read a treatise on this years ago, whereby LDS believe that matter exists from eternity past as do "intelligences." Without really getting into detail about where God the father came from (or by extention any of His fore-father Gods), LDS postulate that God came to be able to collect these little intellegences and form them into higher (smarter) intellegences and bind them to matter. In this sense, all matter (rocks & birds etc.) have a form of intellegence in LDS theology and will inherit a type of redemption.

KD could probably do a better job at presenting these concepts. What I find bothersome is that Mormons will rarely clarify(reveal) this doctrine when discussing certain doctrinal disparities between LDS and Christianity. For example, I asked KD once if Christ has eternally existed. His answer was "yes". What KD failed to mention was that Mormonism holds that Christ (and we too) had pre-existed eternally in the form of these fundamental "intellegences" (as they are a type of building block) and that God the father "created" Jesus first by collecting and organizing these "intellegences" in a sufficient manner to birth this newly formed savior-to-be. In this manner, we are (in their theology) no different that Christ. Also in LDS theology, the father begot the son physically, and in this respect we are different that Jesus, but in their pre-existence the father spiritually begot (organized) all of us.

Please correct me KD, if I have misrepresented the LDS position. I find this "LDS science" fanciful and somewhat interesting. It would be nice if there was a smidgen of Biblical support for it.

[smaller]

KD is correct when he says that we all prexisted. All things come from God through Christ. If that is our origination, then pre-existence is easy enough to "see."

The interesting portion is HOW would one describe a "small" portion of God Himself?

These things are only understood via allegory. God has placed an abundance of factors into our system to SHOW HIMSELF in the physical, WHICH IS ITSELF AN ALLEGORY of Eternal Things.

Eternal Things do not decay, wear out, pass away. How do we "understand" things we cannot SEE? By "allegory."

You cannot see "the devil." You cannot SEE how he works. The Word TRIES to explain these workings, but when they are seen in the "physical" as a "behemoth" for example, we cannot say that "the devil" is a physical "behemoth." He is an anti-spiritual working with POWER.

How much more must we use, see, and understand that allegories are the only way to understand the unseen things?

Deuteronomy 33:27
The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.

2 Corinthians 4:18
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

enjoy!

smaller

[Zakath]

Originally posted by LightSon
Folks of my ilk believe in "'Creation Ex Nilo," implying that at one point in eternity past, all that existed was God, and that He brought matter into being from nothing. In that case you are referring to "creatio ex nihilo", literally "creation from nothing". :think:

[add yasaf]

KingDavid quote - Add Yasaf,

That 'exec' thing in the URL doesn't mean it's one of the worms or viruses going around, now, does it (before I look at it)?


--KING DAVID




No virus, No worries. Great book. Great Joy

[geralduk]

It IS to be taken with BOTH hands and an OPEN heart unto God with a MEAK spirit.
and meditated on day and night.
and..

[Karaite]

There are places in scripture that are obvious metaphors. (Compare Deut. 6:8 and Proverbs 3:3)

However, in regards to Jonah, the Hebrew text does not explicitly say what he was in. It uses terms that would translate literally as "great fish". That phrase, IMO, is not exactly precise in telling us what was in it. It is my opinion that this creature could have been created only for the purpose that we read about in Jonah.

Originally posted by DanielleR

I have a question for all of the believers on the forum. This question isn't meant to spark debate and nobody has to provide any proof... I'm just genuinly curious.

Do you believe that the bible should be taken literally or figuratively? For example... do you believe that the world started with Adam and Eve or is that just symbolic for something? Do you believe that Jonah was really eaten by the whale or was that just a story told to get another point across?

I'd love to hear what everything thinks. Thanks!

[CryTears]

I think our Satan discussion is lost somewhere in the wild blue yonder.:)

[Nietzschean]

Originally posted by DanielleR

I have a question for all of the believers on the forum. This question isn't meant to spark debate and nobody has to provide any proof... I'm just genuinly curious.

Do you believe that the bible should be taken literally or figuratively? For example... do you believe that the world started with Adam and Eve or is that just symbolic for something? Do you believe that Jonah was really eaten by the whale or was that just a story told to get another point across?

I'd love to hear what everything thinks. Thanks!

I hold that - despite what they claim - the greatest majority of self-professing Christians do not believe the Bible is literal truth. Try telling a young woman in this century that her place is in the house with several other wives, and that her virginity is worth about 50 sheckels; it's in the Bible but she'd hear nothing of it. Except for a very scant few, who popular society so nicedly dubs extremists, no one wants to live and worship as depicted in the Bible, under the guidance of God.

[BishopTikon]

Originally posted by DanielleR

I have a question for all of the believers on the forum. This question isn't meant to spark debate and nobody has to provide any proof... I'm just genuinly curious.

Do you believe that the bible should be taken literally or figuratively? For example... do you believe that the world started with Adam and Eve or is that just symbolic for something? Do you believe that Jonah was really eaten by the whale or was that just a story told to get another point across?

I'd love to hear what everything thinks. Thanks!


YES...literally.

:thumb:

[Behira]

Let everything that's proud and lofty then bowdown before the Son of Man.

[CryTears]

Originally posted by crytahvn

Yes, I believe every single word.

One day I thought, if I am going to believe this book, I am going to have to believe everything in it, I am going to have to believe the Noah story. That was hard for me.
After I said, " okay I believe this book and God's message."
I read it with so much more understanding. It was as if I had a veil lifted off.

How happy I am now, because I can see what is happening in the world.
There are those who wish to get it documented either as history or fiction, then when we have strong hate crime laws they can include the bible under those laws.
If so, then the bible will be illegal.


Did Eli break a commandment? bearing a false witness? accusing me of being a Muslim? and Yosiah?
did they bother looking at my posts?
why did they not put this post up?
That I believed the bible every single word.
Is Eli working for the antichrist?
who is against Jesus?http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/Topics/JewishJesus/toledoth.html

[billwald]

Is the encyclopedia to be taken literally? It is the same sort of compilation as the Bible.

[CryTears]

Originally posted by billwald

Is the encyclopedia to be taken literally? It is the same sort of compilation as the Bible.

no.

[Karaite]

Not everything in the bible is intended to be taken literally, for example the bible includes many metaphors and idioms. For example, when we say "knock it off".

Originally posted by billwald

Is the encyclopedia to be taken literally? It is the same sort of compilation as the Bible.