The Literal Meaning of Genesis

[Cygnus]

And we have a winner.

Whether you take Genesis as the early Christians did in a figurative sense, or if you take a more modern approach, it doesn't matter, so long as you get the message. And you clearly have that.

Barnabas took Genesis as very literal in hi epistle.....don't confuse it with the muslim gospel of Barnabas.

Barnabas presents a literal day for the seven days.

 

[calvin]

They're the ones who gave us Trinity, nature of Christ, deity of the Holy Spirit and the canon of scripture.

So... are you saying that the Bible teaches none of these things?
If the Bible teaches Trinity, then how is it you give the glory to mere mortal man?
If the Bible teaches 'the nature of Christ', how is it you give glory to mere mortal man?
If the Bible teaches 'deity of the Holy Spirit' how is it you give glory to mere mortal man?

 

[Barbarian]

Where in the Bible is the Trinity mentioned?

 

[markathome]

Should I turn off the fan?

 

[Jim Parker]

So... are you saying that the Bible teaches none of these things?

No. That is not what I said.

If the Bible teaches Trinity, then how is it you give the glory to mere mortal man?

At least half the 3rd century church denied the deity of Christ.
The truth of the deity of Christ was decided based on the teaching of the apostles (also known as the "apostolic tradition") by the same people who decided what the canon of NT scripture would be.
The reason that you can say "It's in the Bible" is because of those men who fought it out in the 4th century against overwhelming odds.
If it weren't for Clovis1st, king of the Franks in the 5th century converting to the Catholic faith, all of northern Europe would have been Arian.
So for you to so glibly say that the Bible teaches trinity completely ignores the magnitude of the conflict over that teaching.

If the Bible teaches 'the nature of Christ', how is it you give glory to mere mortal man?

Have you not heard of the 1st council of Chalcedon? The "dual" nature of Christ was assailed by several different heresies supported by knowledgeable men who found their support in the Bible. It is taught today by the the entire orthodox Christian church because those men hammered it out some 1500 years ago, not because it is so obvious to you and I by our reading of the scriptures which the Church has preserved.

If the Bible teaches 'deity of the Holy Spirit' how is it you give glory to mere mortal man?

The same school of thought which brought Arianism brought forth the idea that the Holy Spirit was not a person. That heresy was dealt with at the 1st council of Constantinople.

These issues,, which you seem to take for granted, were hard fought and highly contested by well educated and highly trained theologians. Some of them gave their lives for the truth To assume that anyone could just as easily have figured it out on their own shows a complete lack of understanding of what it took the Church to get to that point.

Such is the folly of the "Me and my Bible" crew.

I have not given any glory to mortal men.
But I do recognize that they were the champions and heroes of the faith who, in submission to the leading of the Holy Spirit, made it possible for the Christian faith to have been passed down to us, across almost 2000 years, intact.

 

[Randy]

More than that, as you learned, God made natural law known to all men, so that they do understand good and evil and are, as St. Paul says, without excuse. What I'm concerned about is your suggestion that God borrowed His law from Hammurabi. As I showed you, it's the other way around.



Try Romans 1:20. St. Paul does a much better job of explaining it that I do.

I didn't state God borrowed anything. I don't believe that in the least.
+>Apparently I am having difficulties with "your" message. As I keep pointing out the law was given to Moses from God who predates the world. It has nothing to do with obtaining anything from "Hammurabi" quotes or otherwise even if Hammurabi used like punishments.

Well Adam and Eve had the apple. They then knew good and evil. Not sure an eye for and eye was imparted though.

 

[Barbarian]

I didn't state God borrowed anything. I don't believe that in the least.

I'm pleased to know that. Why did you make the suggestion that He did?

+>Apparently I am having difficulties with "your" message. As I keep pointing out the law was given to Moses from God who predates the world.

That's where that natural law comes in.

Well Adam and Eve had the apple.

I think it's generally not a good idea to add things to scripture that aren't there. No apple is mentioned in the creation story.

 

[Jim Parker]

It has nothing to do with obtaining anything from "Hammurabi" quotes or otherwise even if Hammurabi used like punishments.

The code of Hammurabi was vey different from the Law of Moses. (Which was actually God's law, not Moses' law)
What it did was silence those who insisted that the ancient near eastern cultures were not sophisticated enough to have such an organized, written code of law. The stelle on which Hammurabi is written predates Moses by about 500 years and clearly testifies to the fact that those ancient civilizations were very sophisticated.
In fact, in comparing the Law of Moses to other ancient documents, it is in the exact form of a common Vassal - Suzerain treaty only, in the case of the Old Covenant, the treaty is between the Israelites and, rather than a high king, God who is their proper king.

As for "copying" from Hammurabi, it seems doubtful though there will necessarily be similarities. They are both ancient, near eastern cultures and very closely related. But I AM did not speak to Hammurabi.

iakov the fool

 

[Randy]

I'm pleased to know that. Why did you make the suggestion that He did?



That's where that natural law comes in.



I think it's generally not a good idea to add things to scripture that aren't there. No apple is mentioned in the creation story.

Your quite crafty. Ok Fruit from a tree. Like wise Hammurabi isn't found in scripture and my point all along has been God didn't copy.
Randy

 

[Randy]

The code of Hammurabi was vey different from the Law of Moses. (Which was actually God's law, not Moses' law)
What it did was silence those who insisted that the ancient near eastern cultures were not sophisticated enough to have such an organized, written code of law. The stelle on which Hammurabi is written predates Moses by about 500 years and clearly testifies to the fact that those ancient civilizations were very sophisticated.
In fact, in comparing the Law of Moses to other ancient documents, it is in the exact form of a common Vassal - Suzerain treaty only, in the case of the Old Covenant, the treaty is between the Israelites and, rather than a high king, God who is their proper king.

As for "copying" from Hammurabi, it seems doubtful though there will necessarily be similarities. They are both ancient, near eastern cultures and very closely related. But I AM did not speak to Hammurabi.

iakov the fool

I agree what Jesus stated was from scripture and had nothing to do with Hammurabi. And what Moses gave He received from God.

 

[Randy]

And as I have stated before (not in this thread) the importance is not in the time line but that "God" created. Genesis takes pain to state Gods hand was is every aspect in creation. So in the context "God" created I do take that as literal.

While this is a metaphor I thing it demonstrates Gods divine ability to create.
The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?”

I said, “Sovereign Lord, you alone know.”

4Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breatha enter you, and you will come to life. 6I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’ ”

7So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. 8I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them.

9Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live.’ ” 10So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army.



Randy

 

[Barbarian]

Your quite crafty.

I'm just asking why you suggested that God borrowed His laws from Hammurabi. You never did tell us why.

Ok Fruit from a tree.

Inserting new ideas into Genesis is precisely how the modern doctrine of YE creationism got started. Bad idea.

Like wise Hammurabi isn't found in scripture

Nevertheless, Hammurabi existed, and we have a copy of his laws. Even though they predate Moses, that does not mean that God copied from Hammurabi. Do you see why?

and my point all along has been God didn't copy.

Then why did you bring it up? No one else did. You're not making much sense here.

 

[Randy]

I'm just asking why you suggested that God borrowed His laws from Hammurabi. You never did tell us why.

.

Show me where you think I suggested that as I read "YOU" suggested that and that brought me into this thread to state God wad older than the world as in He didn't copy.

Randy

 

[Barbarian]

Show me where you think I suggested that as I read "YOU" suggested that

(Barbarian checks) No, I never said anything remotely like that. You brought it up. (Barbarian considers) Were you trying to make it up and pretend that I said it?

 

[Randy]

Apparently, his Greek wasn't so good, either.

The "eye for an eye" thing goes back to the Code of Hammurabi. It became a figure of speech in Mesopotamia for "justice will be served."

Didn't know about the "view", but obviously, the meaning remains, regardless. Sounds like someone was doing a play on words only a scholar would catch.

I would state Jesus was not quoting the code of Hammurabi. He was referring to the law that God gave Moses. Jesus's point was love your enemies and don't return evil for evil. However as I also point out the context is individual and not corporate as in speaking against Governing authorities in regard to a judicial system. Dealing with lawbreakers.

Maybe we both misunderstood each other.

Jesus=>“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Ref: Exodus  21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21

Jesus=>You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.


Randy

 

[Barbarian]

As long as we don't have any more of the "God copied from Hammurabi" we're fine.

 

[calvin]

Where in the Bible is the Trinity mentioned?

Does the Bible have to actually say "trinity" for it to be true?
Is there a Father God?
Is there a son of the Father?
Does the Father have a Holy Spirit that can be sent to people either for comforting or for instruction?
Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” Esv.

Do those present here the voice of God the Father?
Is the Son of God there sopping wet?
Is a likeness of a dove which the writer of the gospel identifies as the The Spirit of God also there at that momentous time?
There are many other passages in Scripture that leave trinitarians with no choice but to believe in a trinity.

 

[calvin]

No. That is not what I said.

At least half the 3rd century church denied the deity of Christ.
The truth of the deity of Christ was decided based on the teaching of the apostles (also known as the "apostolic tradition") by the same people who decided what the canon of NT scripture would be.
The reason that you can say "It's in the Bible" is because of those men who fought it out in the 4th century against overwhelming odds.
If it weren't for Clovis1st, king of the Franks in the 5th century converting to the Catholic faith, all of northern Europe would have been Arian.
So for you to so glibly say that the Bible teaches trinity completely ignores the magnitude of the conflict over that teaching.

Have you not heard of the 1st council of Chalcedon? The "dual" nature of Christ was assailed by several different heresies supported by knowledgeable men who found their support in the Bible. It is taught today by the the entire orthodox Christian church because those men hammered it out some 1500 years ago, not because it is so obvious to you and I by our reading of the scriptures which the Church has preserved.

The same school of thought which brought Arianism brought forth the idea that the Holy Spirit was not a person. That heresy was dealt with at the 1st council of Constantinople.

These issues,, which you seem to take for granted, were hard fought and highly contested by well educated and highly trained theologians. Some of them gave their lives for the truth To assume that anyone could just as easily have figured it out on their own shows a complete lack of understanding of what it took the Church to get to that point.

Such is the folly of the "Me and my Bible" crew.

I have not given any glory to mortal men.
But I do recognize that they were the champions and heroes of the faith who, in submission to the leading of the Holy Spirit, made it possible for the Christian faith to have been passed down to us, across almost 2000 years, intact.

Yes I have heard of those councils of which you speak.
I have also heard of the shepherd of Hermus but so what?
The shepherd of Hermus once enjoyed canon status, but later lost it.
Who was right? the early Church or the earlier than early Church.

 

[Randy]

As long as we don't have any more of the "God copied from Hammurabi" we're fine.

I never stated or suggested that.
So in the interest of peace I write this whole dispute as a misunderstanding.
Randy

 

[Randy]

Does the Bible have to actually say "trinity" for it to be true?
Is there a Father God?
Is there a son of the Father?
Does the Father have a Holy Spirit that can be sent to people either for comforting or for instruction?
Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” Esv.

Do those present here the voice of God the Father?
Is the Son of God there sopping wet?
Is a likeness of a dove which the writer of the gospel identifies as the The Spirit of God also there at that momentous time?
There are many other passages in Scripture that leave trinitarians with no choice but to believe in a trinity.

Does the Son have a Holy Spirit to send to others? Yes- The Spirit Jesus sent He received from the Father. The Fathers promise Acts 2.
In regard to Jesus doesn't He have His own spirit apart from the Holy Spirit? Jesus=>"Father into your hands I commit my spirit"
Do you read where the Spirit of God or Holy Spirit of Spirit of truth or Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is a distinct person from the "Father"?

Father=>In the last days I will pour out My Spirit.....
Jesus=>The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is upon me....
Jesus=>For it is not you who will be speaking--it will be the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. (Matt 10:20)

Now I know my Lord, (the head of the body of Christ) and I tell you there are two errors in the Orthodox version of the trinity not found in the NT.
1:Jesus always was. In fact Jesus is Gods firstborn-at some point in history before the world began
2:The Holy Spirit is a separate distinct person from the "Father"

So how then can Jesus be God in any sense of the word? "The fullness was pleased to dwell in Him"

Is Jesus God?
He never dies.
yes, He is all that the Father is. "The exact image of the wisdom and power of God" (given)
no, He has always been the Son.

By whose Spirit were the miracles perform by at Jesus's command?
By whose Spirit was the creation created by at Jesus's command at the direction and will of the Father?
By whose Spirit does Jesus live by?
Not Jesus's own spirit but the Fathers. The One Jesus calls the One true God and His God.

This hasn't changed
Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

One God the Father and One Lord Jesus Christ

So I state Jesus has a beginning but no end and He is what He is by the grace of God for as he taught Jesus received from the Father. The Father is what He is.

Jesus is the Christ the Son of the living God. The mediator between God and man. "The way" to the Father.
Randy