dumb questions I was emailed

[Eternally Grateful]

Does God not also have the power to let us say whatever we please about him without taking offense?

You do realize that doctrinally biased humans translated the Bible, correct?
And they did so from copies, of copies, of copies of manuscripts because God didn't PRESERVE the originals.
Of which he was COMPLETELY capable.

/

That's why I take God literally, unless it is specified we should try to understand the parable..

then we do not have that issue..

but yes. People make the bible say all kinds of things.

yet that does not take away from the word. the word of God is alive and powerful...

 

[St. SteVen]

That's why I take God literally, unless it is specified we should try to understand the parable..

You take parables literally?
Maybe I misunderstand you.

but yes. People make the bible say all kinds of things.

Yes. Lots of that going on.

yet that does not take away from the word. the word of God is alive and powerful...

I agree.

Also important to understand that the Bible is a MEANS to an end, not an END in itself. IMHO
We worship the "author", not the book.

Bibliolatry: Worship/knowledge of the book MORE than the author

I have encountered some that I thought had fallen into this trap. I asked them, "What would become of your faith if you put your whole library out on the curb on trash day?" The guilty are left mostly speechless. Or, alternatively VERY angry. How come? To be clear, I love the Bible and use...

www.christianityboard.com

/

 

[Chadrho]

true

But in the same token. God would not allow such mistakes as to change the meanings of his word. He has the power to preserve it..

Like the genesis account of creation

We will have to disagree on that. I believe the Genesis account communicates spiritual/ transcendent truths, but I don't believe it recounts events that are in a one-to-one correspondence with historical events. For instance, I don't believe the "days" of creation in ch. 1 refer to 24 hour periods. How could they when the first couple days are without the luminaries that inform our understanding of a literal day?

So what spiritual/ transcendent truths are communicated in that first ch.?

-God is creator
-creation is not God
-good and evil (light and dark) are not commensurate
-creation is orderly
-creation is good
-humanity is created in the divine image

If someone believes the account is history but fails to grasp the spiritual truths communicated, believing it's history does them no good. However, if someone like me does not believe it's history but grasps the spiritual truths being communicated, they have exactly the intent of the text to go forward meaningfully, since those truths inform the rest of the scriptures.

And before you make the mistake of assuming if one part of the scriptures is not taken literally, then none of it can be, that's simply a fallacy of composition, i.e., assuming that because a feature of a part is true it must also be true of the whole. For a ready example, just because one Christian takes the creation account in Genesis literally does not entail that all Christians take Genesis literally.

 

[Lambano]

Did Jesus Fart? And if He did, being that he was perfect, did it smell like sweet perfume?

A second century Gnostic Christian named Valentinus wrote that Jesus could not have had normal human excretory functions. Valentinus was denounced by Tertullian and Irenaeus and other Church fathers as a heretic. (Though no doubt they had other reasons.)

Holy S... .
(Don't say it, Lambano! Don't say it! You're thinking it!)

And then there's the controversy about The Holy Prepuce.

Why do we engage in this kind of damnfoolery?

 

[Chadrho]

A second century Gnostic Christian named Valentinus wrote that Jesus could not have had normal human excretory functions. Valentinus was denounced by Tertullian and Irenaeus and other Church fathers as a heretic. (Though no doubt they had other reasons.)

Holy S... .
(Don't say it, Lambano! Don't say it! You're thinking it!)

And then there's the controversy about The Holy Prepuce.

Why do we engage in this kind of damnfoolery?

Poor Tertullian. He basically thought God was a humongous physical being. I mean, you know what comes out of large physical beings. So, yeah, Holy Excrement, Batman!

 

[Lambano]

Poor Tertullian. He basically thought God was a humongous physical being. I mean, you know what cones out of large physical beings. So, yeah, Holy Excrement, Batman!

But, hey, where do we read in the Bible about Jesus ever needing to take a leak?

(Though on a serious note, that does make me appreciate the humility required by the Incarnation. But that's a subject we can't discuss.)

 

[St. SteVen]

Why do we engage in this kind of damnfoolery?

Thanks for keeping Tom out of it. (he gets blamed for everything)

/

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

The cards are 3"x5" in size.

Maybe you should go to a different card size!

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

But, hey, where do we read in the Bible about Jesus ever needing to take a leak?

Just because God's written Word never says "and the Lord went behineth thy bushes to taketh thy leak" or, "they Lord was busy taken a dumpeth" doesn't mean He never had to go #1 or #2.

1 Corinthians 15:40 talks about spiritual bodies and physical bodies... so God has a spiritual Body which is what man's body was based on when God created man in HIS Own Image

If you search the scriptures, before Jesus took upon flesh, there are passages that speak of God having eyes, ears, finger, mouth, feet

These were not just body parts floating around ya know.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You take parables literally?
Maybe I misunderstand you.


Yes. Lots of that going on.


I agree.

Also important to understand that the Bible is a MEANS to an end, not an END in itself. IMHO
We worship the "author", not the book.

Bibliolatry: Worship/knowledge of the book MORE than the author

I have encountered some that I thought had fallen into this trap. I asked them, "What would become of your faith if you put your whole library out on the curb on trash day?" The guilty are left mostly speechless. Or, alternatively VERY angry. How come? To be clear, I love the Bible and use...

www.christianityboard.com

/

I take it literally UNLESS we are told it is a parable. or told to take it symbolically in the letter.

yes we worship the author. But the book tells us who the author is and what he is, what he did. and shared what happens when we do not do what he says

 

[Eternally Grateful]

We will have to disagree on that. I believe the Genesis account communicates spiritual/ transcendent truths, but I don't believe it recounts events that are in a one-to-one correspondence with historical events. For instance, I don't believe the "days" of creation in ch. 1 refer to 24 hour periods. How could they when the first couple days are without the luminaries that inform our understanding of a literal day?

So what spiritual/ transcendent truths are communicated in that first ch.?

-God is creator
-creation is not God
-good and evil (light and dark) are not commensurate
-creation is orderly
-creation is good
-humanity is created in the divine image

If someone believes the account is history but fails to grasp the spiritual truths communicated, believing it's history does them no good. However, if someone like me does not believe it's history but grasps the spiritual truths being communicated, they have exactly the intent of the text to go forward meaningfully, since those truths inform the rest of the scriptures.

And before you make the mistake of assuming if one part of the scriptures is not taken literally, then none of it can be, that's simply a fallacy of composition, i.e., assuming that because a feature of a part is true it must also be true of the whole. For a ready example, just because one Christian takes the creation account in Genesis literally does not entail that all Christians take Genesis literally.

the evening and the morning were the first day

I do not know how anyone could take it to mean anything other than a day.

I do not know what spiritual significance we could gather from making it more than one day.

PS. God was the light on the first few days.. just like in the new jerusalem. God will be the light

 

[amigo de christo]

Well, there's another thing you don't know. I do believe the scriptures are divinely inspired. Furthermore, I believe they're divinely inspired to bear witness to Christ. What I don't believe is that they're inerrant. Being divinely inspired and not-inerrant are compatible. God doesn't need a perfect book to bear witness to Christ just as God did not need a perfect Paul to bear witness to Christ. Clay jars and all.

Right you mean you pick and choose what group who best interprets it the way you like it .
I mean you sure seem to a supporting something the scripture makes very clear is SIN .
Inerrant . if by inerrant you mean MEN can misundersand it , THEN I GOTTA FULLY AGREE WITH THAT .
But many can use that word too and yet they do as men do they TWIST unto their own destruction .
Be encouraged now .

 

[Lambano]

Thanks for keeping Tom out of it. (he gets blamed for everything)

/

I've got a couple of "Toms" in my family. It's bad enough they have to put up with the "Doubting Thomas" moniker....

Of course, as was noted in an episode of M*A*S*H, no one names their kids "Judas" these days. (Sheesh, how many brain cells have I wasted remembering dialog from 70's sit-coms?)

 

[amigo de christo]

the evening and the morning were the first day

I do not know how anyone could take it to mean anything other than a day.

I do not know what spiritual significance we could gather from making it more than one day.

PS. God was the light on the first few days.. just like in the new jerusalem. God will be the light

Sit back. causeyou wont believe what man is capable of believing so long as IT FITS what his own heart desired.
THEY can explain away many things . Just wanted to remind you of that fact . cause i have
delt with many IN PERSON andon sites . OH they gonna try and tell ya things from peter
as they twist scrips unto their own destruction . YOU SEE EVOLUTION to many brings them a false comfort
just as do anddoes the physologies of men . TRY asking the person you are addressing simple questions
about SINS . YOU WILL SEE THEY GONNA JUSTIFY a sin . I GUARANTEE IT . that is how you will know .
Cause while its true we will not know all things , SINS are something the HOLY GHOST will convict us of
YOU WATCH . THE CHALLENGE TO ALL TODAY IS THIS .
no matter how wise one sounds , return to the simple things . Start talking bout SINS and see
what they do and how they either try and downplay it or omit it as sin all together . THAT IS HOW YE GONNA KNOW REAL FAST .
no lamb would justify homosexuality or the love of money or etc . WHILE its true we might not know everything
THE SPIRIT wont allow us to justify or downplay SIN . THEY DO . DARE YOU TO ASK this person to whom you are speaking
or i should say typing , HOW THEY VIEW certain sins . YOU WATCH . THEN YE SHALL KNOW , OOPS .

 

[amigo de christo]

I've got a couple of "Toms" in my family. It's bad enough they have to put up with the "Doubting Thomas" moniker....

Of course, as was noted in an episode of M*A*S*H, no one names their kids "Judas" these days. (Sheesh, how many brain cells have I wasted remembering dialog from 70's sit-coms?)

In todays love generation , they might be called TAMS . ol tommy became a tammy if ya know what i mean .
The church seems to embrace many sins these days . Just a super friendly reminder to all that has breath .

 

[amigo de christo]

To this generation doubting thomas has become KNOWING TAMMY . but let us go and learn what the heck that means .

 

[Chadrho]

the evening and the morning were the first day

I do not know how anyone could take it to mean anything other than a day.

I do not know what spiritual significance we could gather from making it more than one day.

PS. God was the light on the first few days.. just like in the new jerusalem. God will be the light

God was the light of the first few days? That's not what the text literally says. I guess you take it literally until you don't. But, yeah, I'm the one that needs correcting. Pfft.

 

[Chadrho]

Right you mean you pick and choose what group who best interprets it the way you like it .
I mean you sure seem to a supporting something the scripture makes very clear is SIN .
Inerrant . if by inerrant you mean MEN can misundersand it , THEN I GOTTA FULLY AGREE WITH THAT .
But many can use that word too and yet they do as men do they TWIST unto their own destruction .
Be encouraged now .

Are you going to follow me around? Do you like me? That's sweet you got a thing for me. I'm blushing!

 

[amigo de christo]

Are you going to follow me around? Do you like me? That's sweet you got a thing for me. I'm blushing!

Just exposing the lies is all . To keep leaven at bay and in hopes you shall be led to repentance

 

[amigo de christo]

God was the light of the first few days? That's not what the text literally says. I guess you take it literally until you don't. But, yeah, I'm the one that needs correcting. Pfft.

Talk about pretzels . try again . What you said makes zero sense . not me or the other says for just the first few days
that GOD was the LIGHT . YOU are hunting far and wide to try and justify lies . But , lambs smell right through it .