Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 103

Thread: How literal are you?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    3,530

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
    Thanks Walls. Can you give an example of scriptur that creates an absurdity?
    Just to be clear, I assume you mean a scripture that, when taken literally, creates an absurdity, for no scripture in itself creates an absurdity if dealt with correctly. I'm just being clear because other readers are ready to pounce.

    Let us take the length of Adam's life. Or better said, when did he die? Genesis 2:17 says; "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for IN the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." The Christian is seemingly faced with a dilemma. Did Adam eat of this tree in his 930th year and die on that day? Well, this is not possible because then his children would not have been fallen and not have possessed sin and death. They would have been born before sin. He ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil before having offspring and although we don't know how long it was until he brought forth Cain (who was obviously fallen), but Seth came forth after 130 years (Gen.5:3). So Adam ate of the forbidden Tree a long time before his 130th birthday*. My point is that if we take the "day IN" Adam ate of the Tree and died as literally a 24 hours day, we create an absurdity.

    The solution is then to study all the days of the Bible and see if we can come up with an answer. And surely we find the solution, AND THE REASON WHY. We find that there are FIVE different days in the Bible. They are;
    1. The period of daylight - sunrise to sunset (e.g. Gen.1:5)
    2. 24 hours - the evening and the morning (e.g. Gen.1:8)
    3. An event like the "Day of the Lord" (e.g. 2nd Pet.3:10)
    4. 1 year - mostly used in prophecy (e.g. Nu.14:34; Ezek.4:6; Dan.9:24-26)
    5. 1,000 years is as a DAY to God (Ps.90:4; 2nd Pet.3:8)

    And since Adam lived 930 years, ONLY ONE FITS. It must be number 5. Adam, at 930 years, died "IN" or "WITHIN" that day. Why is this important? It is important because this day was also God's Sabbath Rest. Notice that the Holy Spirit named the six preceding days by "the evening and the morning" - that is, 24 hours starting at sunset. But He pointedly left out defining the Seventh day. The Seventh Day, God's Rest, is defined by Adam's lifetime - that is, 1,000 years. AND THIS allows Hebrews 3 and 4 to be suddenly made clear in respect of God's Rest.

    In Hebrews Chapters 3 and 4 TWO more Rests are advanced. The first is Israel's sojourn in the Good Land, which was doubly unsuccessful, and the second is the FUTURE REST that will be successful. Israel were saved in Egypt by the Lamb FOR their inheritance - the Good Land. But only two men of war, Joshua and Caleb, made it into the Land. Hebrews 3:10-11 says that these approximately 600,000 men did not enter in God's Rest, making the occupying of the Land God's Rest. Then, because the chronology of the Old Testament is so good, we can deduct the time that Israel actually occupied the Good Land. And we find that from crossing Jordan to take the Land, to the carrying away to Babylon, was just UNDER 1,000 years. So in Hebrews 4:6-9 we see that because this Rest failed (or was not completed like Adam's), there is a "REMAINING REST" still FUTURE. And truly, we find this REST in Revelation 20 where, when Christ returns with His Overcomers, rules the earth for a COMPLETE 1,000 years. And once again, if we calculate the chronology of the Bible, we find the "Future Rest" to be the 7th-one-thousand-year period since Adam - the "Millennium" as we call it.

    Finally, the FAILURE, by some Bible students, of interpreting scripture with scripture to avoid an absurdity, leads to more folly. Many Bible students refuse to apply the Bible to interpret the Bible, so they come up with a NON-BIBLICAL theory - a "private interpretation" (2nd Pet.1:20). They cannot calculate a reasonable answer for the "DAY within" which Adam died, so they INVENT an answer. They say; "ADAM DIED SPIRITUALLY"! But this concept is unknown to scripture. There is not a single verse that even alludes to the fact that a spirit can die - whether God (who is a Spirit), or an angle (which are spirits), or a demon (which is a spirit), or the human spirit. "DYING SPIRITUALLY" IS A HUMAN INVENTION and there is absolutely NO proof in all the Bible for this Term or Concept. It is the result of men trying to solve an absurdity by "PRIVATE INTERPRETATION"!

    Thus, the PARABOLIC understanding of the "DAY" within which Adam died, allows us to define the FUTURE, or REMAINING, SABBATH REST of Hebrews 4. The LITERAL leads to absurdity.



    * Since Adam died at 930, he most probably ate of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil sometime before he was 70 years old - but this cannot be proved with scripture - just deduction.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    772
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Just to be clear, I assume you mean a scripture that, when taken literally, creates an absurdity, for no scripture in itself creates an absurdity if dealt with correctly. I'm just being clear because other readers are ready to pounce.

    Let us take the length of Adam's life. Or better said, when did he die? Genesis 2:17 says; "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for IN the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." The Christian is seemingly faced with a dilemma. Did Adam eat of this tree in his 930th year and die on that day? Well, this is not possible because then his children would not have been fallen and not have possessed sin and death. They would have been born before sin. He ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil before having offspring and although we don't know how long it was until he brought forth Cain (who was obviously fallen), but Seth came forth after 130 years (Gen.5:3). So Adam ate of the forbidden Tree a long time before his 130th birthday*. My point is that if we take the "day IN" Adam ate of the Tree and died as literally a 24 hours day, we create an absurdity.

    [...]
    I think you make this to complicated and you're leaning to heavily on the translation.

    If you examine what is said in Hebrew, you'll find that that is says « dying thou shalt die » Gen. 2:17. So IN the day he ate of the forbidden fruit, the process that would lead to his death started. The reason for this is he needed the fruit of the tree of life. Which he was allowed to eat of. Gen. 2:16. That's why God placed the cherubim to guard it so he would not eat from it and live « for ever » (Hebrew the olam) Gen. 3:22. And he didn't live the whole olam which lasted 1656 years.

    I don't think Scripture says anywhere how old he was when he ate. So, if you look at the inspired text, there is no absurdity and things can be taken literal.

    Aristarkos

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    3,310
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Old man View Post
    That becomes the difficult part.

    "Knowing" what the author intended.

    Since none of the authors of the Bible stated how they intended their writings to be taken it is completely up to the reader to decide how the author meant it to be taken. Which brings us back to David's question.
    It isn't as hard as it sounds. We do it everyday when we read the newspaper, a magazine, or a book.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    3,310
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
    So you would cut off your hand?
    Sell all your posessions?
    Those were spoken literal, no?
    What do you think?

    That is, think about what you read. In most cases it isn't that hard to know whether the author intended a particular passage literally or figuratively.

    For instance, go back to the passage where Jesus talks about the hand and the eye. What's he doing there?

    Matthew 5:
    29 If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.30 If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

    Pay attention to phrases such as the one in bold. Here the writer gives us a clue as to how to situate ourselves to the passage. Jesus is using a comparative, asking his disciples to judge the relative value of a hand as compared to life in the coming kingdom of God. Which is better? Is he saying you would be better off without an eye? No. Not necessarily. Why? Because entrance into the kingdom of God is predicated on the proper inwardness. Even if a man were to remove his eye, it wouldn't make a bit of difference apart from the proper inwarness -- the proper perspective, attitude and values. It isn't as if he is asking us to remove our eye, he is asking us to value the kingdom of God more than an eye. His focus is on our attitude and value system. He is asking us to judge which is better.

    Now, why do you suppose he chose the eye and the hand? Why not the head or the foot? Jesus' choice of body parts also communicates an idea.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    3,310
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
    Sell all your possessions?
    Here we examine the occasion on which Jesus made this statement and to whom did he make it.

    Matthew 19:20-22
    20 The young man *said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?” 21 Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” 22 But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property.


    Here Jesus is having a conversation with a young man, who came to Jesus asking how to receive eternal life. Now, notice how the young man forms his question. He is not asking the general question, "what must we all do to get eternal life?" His question isn't hypothetical. He doesn't ask, "Rabbi, suppose someone wanted to find eternal life, how would they go about it?" His question isn't academic or theoretical. Pay attention to how the young man asks his question.

    Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?”

    Notice that he uses the first person "I" twice in that sentence. This question is vitally important, and personally significant for him. He wants to know, as the question applies to him personally, how HE can obtain eternal life? What must HE do?

    Since the young man has formed his question as touching on his own eternal status, Jesus gives the young man a specific answer targeted on him specifically. I think we would all like to ask Jesus this same question, or perhaps we might be too afraid to ask. "Might there be something about my attitudes or behaviors that would keep me from obtaining eternal life?" For the young man, trusting in wealth was his personal stumbling block. Ours might be different.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    3,310
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Slug1 View Post
    CandZ, but you "ADD" something to literalization that isn't intended at all. When Jesus is teaching a lesson or giving a command to the Apostles, you are on record in a few threads as stating that those lessons and commands are ONLY for them, not "us" to learn from and to take literal. That it's "your" agenda to teach others that WHEN Jesus is speaking to the Apostles... it's pure to them, not to us? Seems that's more about taking scripture literally too literal?

    The Bible clearly points out that a lesson IS to be learned/applied by ALL based on how one's "life" is "affected" by the lesson FOUND within a scripture... no matter who the person was in the Bible receiving the lesson.
    You have misunderstood my position.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    27,718
    Blog Entries
    92

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    You have misunderstood my position.
    I read your posts... now have it saved in notes too. I have not misunderstood.

    Care to make clear then?
    Slug1--out

    ~At the end of the day, the Cross we bear... is small!~

    ~Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,~


    ~"It is one thing to speak God's name in a message but another to speak of God's standards in a message. The name of God is not removed from many a message today but the standards of God... ARE removed."~

    ~"Psalm 106:23 Therefore He said that He would destroy them, Had not Moses His chosen one stood before Him in the breach, To turn away His wrath, lest He destroy them."...
    So don't say that God never meant to destroy the Hebrews, to do so, makes God a liar.~



  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,433

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
    When you read the Bible how literal do you take it?

    Hopefully when we read the Bible we are asking the Holy Spirit for understanding and discernment, but obviously not everyone is doing this otherwise we would agree on everything.

    It just seems like people read the Bible with a certain mindset, either super literal or not literal at all, or somewhere in between.

    I was just curious to know how others see themselves when reading the Bible, literal or no?

    Thanks.
    Literally, but not necessarily literally, or concretely.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    3,530

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarkos View Post
    I think you make this to complicated and you're leaning to heavily on the translation.

    If you examine what is said in Hebrew, you'll find that that is says « dying thou shalt die » Gen. 2:17. So IN the day he ate of the forbidden fruit, the process that would lead to his death started. The reason for this is he needed the fruit of the tree of life. Which he was allowed to eat of. Gen. 2:16. That's why God placed the cherubim to guard it so he would not eat from it and live « for ever » (Hebrew the olam) Gen. 3:22. And he didn't live the whole olam which lasted 1656 years.

    I don't think Scripture says anywhere how old he was when he ate. So, if you look at the inspired text, there is no absurdity and things can be taken literal.

    Aristarkos
    You have not addressed my argument, only disagreed with it based on your rendering of "die" as; "So IN the day he ate of the forbidden fruit, the process that would lead to his death started". But if you study how this word "die" is used by the Holy Spirit THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE BIBLE (835 times), you will be hard-pressed to support your understanding. In fact you would cause your own set of absurdities. Let us add your rendering to the next two mentions outside of the garden of Eden. Your rendering then of Genesis 5:5 would be;
    "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and the process which led to his death started".
    Again, Genesis 5:8 with your rendering would read;
    "And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he began the process which led to his death" (which process could last another 930 years like Adam's).

    But the process which led to both these men's death was the day Adam ate from the forbidden Tree.

    Both Strong and Vine give it as essentially "loose one's life", which leaves you with the same problem of IN which "day" did Adam "loose his life".

    Is my posting complicated? Yes. And for the Christian who is new or has been fed a diet of "milk" all his Christian life (as the modern Church is wont to do), it is mind-boggling. I remember back all those ears when I was first confronted with it. But these Christians have another Teacher, the Holy Spirit, and those who God intends, will ultimately embrace it because there is much more to it that I did not mention. The Sabbath for instance is a Covenant with Israel. This Covenant still needs to be fulfilled. When and Where? A lot more on this "First Seventh" which neither Adam, nor Israel fulfilled, needs to be explained. And one cannot do it without the defining of the first Sabbath. But more than this, the Millennial Kingdom is set forth as a PRIZE to the diligent Christian. He better know about the first Sabbath so that he can fix his eyes on the same PRIZE as our Lord Jesus set forth for those who loose things because of Him.

    But after all, I applaud your effort to take things literally as far as is possible.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    221

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    It isn't as hard as it sounds. We do it everyday when we read the newspaper, a magazine, or a book.
    Really? Then why is it the Bible (rather the people who have read it), has caused more debates, more divisions, and more harm then any other written material that has ever existed?
    Was that its intention? I don't think so, it's not really up for interpertation, is it? The Bible interprets itself.
    So, no, it's not like reading a newspaper or a random book, it's the Word of God.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    27,718
    Blog Entries
    92

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
    Really? Then why is it the Bible (rather the people who have read it), has caused more debates, more divisions, and more harm then any other written material that has ever existed?
    Was that its intention? I don't think so, it's not really up for interpertation, is it? The Bible interprets itself.
    So, no, it's not like reading a newspaper or a random book, it's the Word of God.
    Some regard the Bible as a book and is thus, informative logos to them. While some regard the Bible are what it is... God's Word and is thus life changing rhema AND the logos.

    Fruit of either, is clear.
    Slug1--out

    ~At the end of the day, the Cross we bear... is small!~

    ~Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,~


    ~"It is one thing to speak God's name in a message but another to speak of God's standards in a message. The name of God is not removed from many a message today but the standards of God... ARE removed."~

    ~"Psalm 106:23 Therefore He said that He would destroy them, Had not Moses His chosen one stood before Him in the breach, To turn away His wrath, lest He destroy them."...
    So don't say that God never meant to destroy the Hebrews, to do so, makes God a liar.~



  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    221

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Athanasius View Post
    Literally, but not necessarily literally, or concretely.
    Could you expand on this?
    Thanks.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    221

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Slug1 View Post
    Some regard the Bible as a book and is thus, informative logos to them. While some regard the Bible are what it is... God's Word and is thus life changing rhema AND the logos.

    Fruit of either, is clear.
    I learn something new everyday....hard to imagine having that viewpoint. Thanks.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    13,658

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
    Really? Then why is it the Bible (rather the people who have read it), has caused more debates, more divisions, and more harm then any other written material that has ever existed?
    Was that its intention? I don't think so, it's not really up for interpertation, is it? The Bible interprets itself.
    So, no, it's not like reading a newspaper or a random book, it's the Word of God.
    It goes back to the heart of man.

    John 14:21
    21 "He who has My commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves Me; and he who loves Me shall be loved by My Father, and I will love him, and will disclose Myself to him."
    NASB

    Jesus discloses Himself to those that love Him. The greatest weapon against deception, is knowing God loves us and loving Him back because of His great love to us. All of us generally approach the the book wrongly at some point in our lives. But as one grows to love the Lord more and more, God will disclose Himself more and more to that person. Of the 12 apostles, one disciple described Himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved. Guess which one got the most revelation? The more we see the Lord's love for us, the more we will love Him and the more of Himself He will teach us.
    Matt 9:13
    13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
    NASU

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    772
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: How literal are you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    You have not addressed my argument, only disagreed with it based on your rendering of "die" as; "So IN the day he ate of the forbidden fruit, the process that would lead to his death started". But if you study how this word "die" is used by the Holy Spirit THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE BIBLE (835 times), you will be hard-pressed to support your understanding. In fact you would cause your own set of absurdities. Let us add your rendering to the next two mentions outside of the garden of Eden. Your rendering then of Genesis 5:5 would be;
    "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and the process which led to his death started".
    Again, Genesis 5:8 with your rendering would read;
    "And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he began the process which led to his death" (which process could last another 930 years like Adam's).

    But the process which led to both these men's death was the day Adam ate from the forbidden Tree.

    Both Strong and Vine give it as essentially "loose one's life", which leaves you with the same problem of IN which "day" did Adam "loose his life".

    Is my posting complicated? Yes. And for the Christian who is new or has been fed a diet of "milk" all his Christian life (as the modern Church is wont to do), it is mind-boggling. I remember back all those ears when I was first confronted with it. But these Christians have another Teacher, the Holy Spirit, and those who God intends, will ultimately embrace it because there is much more to it that I did not mention. The Sabbath for instance is a Covenant with Israel. This Covenant still needs to be fulfilled. When and Where? A lot more on this "First Seventh" which neither Adam, nor Israel fulfilled, needs to be explained. And one cannot do it without the defining of the first Sabbath. But more than this, the Millennial Kingdom is set forth as a PRIZE to the diligent Christian. He better know about the first Sabbath so that he can fix his eyes on the same PRIZE as our Lord Jesus set forth for those who loose things because of Him.

    But after all, I applaud your effort to take things literally as far as is possible.
    You didn't understand what I said. Let's take your assumption (I think it was you) that Adam was 70 years old when he ate of the forbidden fruit. THAT moment the process that would surely lead to his death started. In his case it took 860 years. People just got much older before the flood. So your examples are in fact an absurdity, because of your misunderstanding. We still have the same process going on today. From the moment we are born the process that will lead to our deaths starts.

    Aristarkos

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Discussion If Revelation is so literal then why?
    By marty fox in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 177
    Last Post: Sep 8th 2014, 10:47 AM
  2. Replies: 143
    Last Post: Jul 6th 2010, 07:46 PM
  3. how literal....
    By ilovemetal in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Aug 1st 2009, 05:37 PM
  4. Literal Noah's Ark
    By RRWick in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: Jun 26th 2007, 06:22 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •