Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Prophetic Word

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ForHisglory
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by randyk View Post
    That is such an ignorant statement I can hardly comment on it! I am *not* arguing against the inspiration of Scriptures! I'm arguing about *how* God communicated that message to us! It began--it clearly began--by God communicating in the Hebrew language of Moses, in his time, to the people of his time--Israel! If you want to go on slandering me, as if I don't believe in the inspiration of Scripture, because I don't think Moses had the US or the UK in mind, fine. That's your problem. But that's silly...unbelievably silly and immature.
    I don't think you are arguing against the inspiration of scripture.

    The Prophets, including Moses, did not always fully appreciate the extent to which their prophecies would go, or precisely how they would be fulfilled...
    However this is where your thinking starts to go wrong.
    It does NOT matter in the slightest how much Moses, or any other prophet UNDERSTOOD or fully appreciated the prophecy they were given. It is this REQUIREMENT of yours that the prophet given the prophecy MUST understand it for it to be valid is where you are then going against the PURPOSE of the prophecy.
    Daniel noted himself when he did not understand, and he prayed for understanding, and gained some.

    Now I underlined the issue, for you think it is RELEVANT that Moses must have the US or the UK in mind when stating the Word of God, in order for it to be about the US or the UK.
    Prophecy is NOT about the mind of the prophet BUT about the mind of God. It is therefore about what He is revealing of His mind that we should be focused upon.

    However having said all that I believe that God's word was to have had meaning for the people it was given to even when they did not understand everything.
    This though comes back to how well we can understand someone from a culture and place dislocated by thousands of years and language.

    There are things in the NT which help us to understand things in the OT, but your usage of seeing a black cloud and so fleeing from rain would NOT lead you to write hyperbole that the whole world is flooded, especially when this is something handed down orally (as best as we can understand) and that Shem was alive at the time of Abraham and could have told him personally what happened. Moses was only the 4th generation from Abraham:
    Gen 15:16* And they shall come back here in the fourth generation...

    So Abraham could have heard it from an eye-witness (Shem) and could then have passed this on to his son(s) and grandsons - he lived to 175 and Isaac was born when he was 100, and Jacob (Israel) when Isaac was 60 (Gen 25:26), so Abraham was alive and would live for a further 15 years, which means both Esau and Jacob could hear the story of the flood from Abraham, who could have heard it direct from Shem. Moses was the son of Amram and Jochebed, Amram was the son of Kohath and Jochebed his sister (Exodus 6:16 - 20). Kohath the son of Levi.
    Again this means an oral passing down of the story is not problematic.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walls
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by randyk View Post
    That is such an ignorant statement I can hardly comment on it! I am *not* arguing against the inspiration of Scriptures! I'm arguing about *how* God communicated that message to us! It began--it clearly began--by God communicating in the Hebrew language of Moses, in his time, to the people of his time--Israel! If you want to go on slandering me, as if I don't believe in the inspiration of Scripture, because I don't think Moses had the US or the UK in mind, fine. That's your problem. But that's silly...unbelievably silly and immature.

    The Prophets, including Moses, did not always fully appreciate the extent to which their prophecies would go, or precisely how they would be fulfilled...

    1 Peter 1.10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, 11 trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow. 12 It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.

    To be fair, as much as I may disagree with you on a number of issues, I believe you are a gifted teacher, and handle the Scriptures respectfully. But you seem to have a mountain of pride when others disagree with you. That's unfortunate, because a little humility, or a little tolerance, will go a long ways to making your ministry of the word more effective and more expansive.
    I hear your judgment. I have no comment.

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by Walls View Post
    That is where we differ greatly. You attribute Genesis to Moses within his culture and language. I attribute it to the breathing of the Most High for all men in all ages. It is great loss to all when a Christian attributes the INSPIRED RECORD to mere fallen men within a short span of time and culture. It is also the weapon of men who would insert their own ideas to the subterfuge of other men.
    That is such an ignorant statement I can hardly comment on it! I am *not* arguing against the inspiration of Scriptures! I'm arguing about *how* God communicated that message to us! It began--it clearly began--by God communicating in the Hebrew language of Moses, in his time, to the people of his time--Israel! If you want to go on slandering me, as if I don't believe in the inspiration of Scripture, because I don't think Moses had the US or the UK in mind, fine. That's your problem. But that's silly...unbelievably silly and immature.

    The Prophets, including Moses, did not always fully appreciate the extent to which their prophecies would go, or precisely how they would be fulfilled...

    1 Peter 1.10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, 11 trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow. 12 It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.

    To be fair, as much as I may disagree with you on a number of issues, I believe you are a gifted teacher, and handle the Scriptures respectfully. But you seem to have a mountain of pride when others disagree with you. That's unfortunate, because a little humility, or a little tolerance, will go a long ways to making your ministry of the word more effective and more expansive.

    Originally posted by Walls
    The plain language of the Lord as He inspired Moses, David, Solomon and Peter is enough for me. I do not have to change a thing. The whole earth, to a depth of fifteen cubits over the highest mountain, was covered by the flood of Noah. That is very specific! Scripture says so, and I defend that to the uttermost. You and Mr. Ramm can contend, but you have only YOUR INVENTION to support you. I have multiple statements to the effect, and you have NOT ONE for yours. And so it will be for ALL scripture. Try to drag it down to a human level if you wish, but without me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walls
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by randyk View Post
    The book was written probably by Moses in his *time.* And he wrote it in his own *language.* And he wrote it for the *Hebrew people.* The fact the book has been translated and given to the world by God does not alter these facts. If we wish to understand the Bible for ourselves, we do not read our language, culture, and time back into Genesis. We try to learn the time that it was written in the language it was written in, and the people for whom it was written. It is important to understand Ancient Near East Culture to properly understand Genesis.
    That is where we differ greatly. You attribute Genesis to Moses within his culture and language. I attribute it to the breathing of the Most High for all men in all ages. It is great loss to all when a Christian attributes the INSPIRED RECORD to mere fallen men within a short span of time and culture. It is also the weapon of men who would insert their own ideas to the subterfuge of other men.

    Originally posted by randyk View Post
    No, that is just using the "science" portion of our brains to exercise common sense, which is what God called us to when He said, "Come let us reason together." The wisdom books recommend common sense, or "wisdom," in the exercise of our faculties in a fruitful way. To bypass sound judgment, and to reject scientific knowledge, borders on cultism. "Suspend judgment and follow me."

    Nobody said that people across the world were left stranded in the tops of mountain ranges. That is pure sensationalism! What Ram said was that *conservative scholars* tend to view the Flood as a supernatural event from God, and yet with naturalistic causes. And this book was written back in the 50s!

    A local flood of gigantic proportions would not have to cover high mountain ranges to submerge the territory we speak of. We are talking about the destruction of an early culture out of which the world emerged. A flood that stretched as far as the eye could see, in all directions, could destroy an entire civilization in that region! A flood high enough to cover all local mountains, which in some areas were not extremely high mountain ranges, would kill all the creatures in that area.

    None of this violates the biblical account. The use of universal language is experience-oriented, and not an astronomical statement. For you to read astronomy back into the biblical record is, I believe, wrong. But I think we've said our peace.
    The plain language of the Lord as He inspired Moses, David, Solomon and Peter is enough for me. I do not have to change a thing. The whole earth, to a depth of fifteen cubits over the highest mountain, was covered by the flood of Noah. That is very specific! Scripture says so, and I defend that to the uttermost. You and Mr. Ramm can contend, but you have only YOUR INVENTION to support you. I have multiple statements to the effect, and you have NOT ONE for yours. And so it will be for ALL scripture. Try to drag it down to a human level if you wish, but without me.

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by Walls View Post
    OK. The matter of the volume of water has been thrashed out. Let the reader judge. I guess that according to Ramm, there was lots of high ground available for a portion of the world's population to survive on, but the murder rate for these choice bits of ground was rather high. Be that as it may, I would like only to comment on your (and Ramm's) allusions to a "cultural understand" of the Biblical language. This I fully reject because that would mean that God wrote His record ONLY for a certain culture and a certain time, leaving the rest of mankind to study the "culture" that had long since passed away. This is a standard argument of men claiming "higher revelation" who would like to lord over the laity. It was the tactic of the Roman Church. And it is the tactic of every cult leader. Moses did not write about the flood to one culture. He wrote it for every man who would ever open this most sold, and most studied Book in the world, IN EVERY AGE AND CULTURE.
    The book was written probably by Moses in his *time.* And he wrote it in his own *language.* And he wrote it for the *Hebrew people.* The fact the book has been translated and given to the world by God does not alter these facts. If we wish to understand the Bible for ourselves, we do not read our language, culture, and time back into Genesis. We try to learn the time that it was written in the language it was written in, and the people for whom it was written. It is important to understand Ancient Near East Culture to properly understand Genesis.

    Originally posted by Walls
    I vehemently maintain that the inspired record is so constructed that anyone with high-school language abilities IN ANY CULTURE ON EARTH can read the words of scripture and understand the plain statements. And any man or woman who humbly and prayerfully approaches God's Book with the intent to take it as it is, will receive the necessary light as to its meaning. That is why we need to take it as it is. Trying to outguess God as to the volume of water needed to cover Everest is the fruit of NOT BELIEVING what God has chosen to write.
    No, that is just using the "science" portion of our brains to exercise common sense, which is what God called us to when He said, "Come let us reason together." The wisdom books recommend common sense, or "wisdom," in the exercise of our faculties in a fruitful way. To bypass sound judgment, and to reject scientific knowledge, borders on cultism. "Suspend judgment and follow me."

    Nobody said that people across the world were left stranded in the tops of mountain ranges. That is pure sensationalism! What Ram said was that *conservative scholars* tend to view the Flood as a supernatural event from God, and yet with naturalistic causes. And this book was written back in the 50s!

    A local flood of gigantic proportions would not have to cover high mountain ranges to submerge the territory we speak of. We are talking about the destruction of an early culture out of which the world emerged. A flood that stretched as far as the eye could see, in all directions, could destroy an entire civilization in that region! A flood high enough to cover all local mountains, which in some areas were not extremely high mountain ranges, would kill all the creatures in that area.

    None of this violates the biblical account. The use of universal language is experience-oriented, and not an astronomical statement. For you to read astronomy back into the biblical record is, I believe, wrong. But I think we've said our peace.

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by Keraz View Post
    I called your conversation with Walls interesting because I like to read such discussions. I called it useless because there is no way a final answer can be reached.

    I will continue to warn about a Coronal Mass Ejection as the means the Lord will change this world and set the scene for all the rest that must happen; leading up to the Return of Jesus. A CME of unprecedented magnitude, Joel 2:2b, Isaiah 30:26, Malachi 4:1, Psalms 50:1-3, is the only natural event that will literally fulfil all the cosmic and earthly effects as prophesied. It has to be a natural event, so the ungodly survivors can carry on in their godlessness and eventually worship the 'beast'.

    That many can't see this scenario, is also prophesied; Isaiah 29:9-12, Matthew 11:25, Jeremiah 6:10, +, and only after it happens, will most people finally understand. Isaiah 35:4-5, Jeremiah 23:20, Isaiah 32:3-4
    We *cannot* make the assumption that these OT passages refer to an EMP because the authors were speaking in the language of their own time, and had no scientific knowledge that would warrant that kind of understanding. Their likely understanding would involve things that they'd already experienced in their own day, being described often in metaphorical language.

    I appreciate that you like to listen in on discussions, but why indulge in something that has no redeeming value? I, however, believe that *any questions* we seriously engage in are worthwhile, if for no other reason that the person himself or herself has *infinite value* to God. Their interests are God's interests.

    But I do appreciate the fact you are somewhat intrigued by our discussions. And I certainly don't discount the *possibility* that a CME will take place on a large scale. I just can't say that the Scriptures specifically prescribe that. To get too caught up in a single prophetic interpretation is unbalanced, to me. On the other hand, your focus on divine judgment has great value, I believe. And I do appreciate that.

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by Walls View Post
    OK. I hear you. But why the designation "hyper-literally". Is is not just plain "literal"? You have just posted two postings with your thoughts. May i assign them to allegory and say that you have not meant what you say?

    While you decide on that, where shall all the water of the oceans go on the New Earth (Rev.21:1)? Or has God made another mathematical miscalculation which He cannot cope with?
    A "new creation" means, to me, not a re-creation of the universe, but rather, a "reform," or "regeneration," of the universe. I believe God when He said that He made the universe "in the beginning," and finished his work by the 6th day. A "new" heavens, and a "new" earth, can refer to something "renewed."

    I refer to your interpretation as "hyper-literal" because that is exactly how I see it from my perspective. The literal understanding would be understood as that contemporary culture would understand it, since it was written *in their culture.* They would not be speaking in astronomical terms. No, their sense of universality would have to do with experience--their experience in particular. Everything within the realm of their immediate experience would indicate "everything." Outside of their own personal experience are other things.

    If I looked up into the sky and saw a huge black cloud, I would run for cover. And as the rain poured down, I would express that "everything under the sky is flooding." That doesn't refer to the *globe* of the earth, but only my own personal experience.

    To be "hyper-literal" and "dogmatic" is to then require that my comments actually mean that the entire globe has to be saturated with water. It is putting words in my mouth, or interpreting those words in a way I didn't actually mean. Hence, your view to me is "hyper-literal."

    Originally posted by Walls
    Consider this. In Genesis 1:2 the earth was covered with water. God dispensed with the water by creating a canopy of water above the earth and the sea below. In Genesis 7 NOTHING NEW was needed. The Greenhouse Canopy crashed to earth in rain and the sea was stirred up beyond its God given boundaries. Has He not set the quantity and boundaries of the sea? Proverbs 8:23-29 says;

    23 "I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
    24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
    25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
    26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
    27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
    28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
    29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth
    :"


    You see brother, in one breath you and Ram admit to God's ability and omnipotence, but in the next you say it was not logistically possible to cover the earth.
    WRONG! That is the exact opposite of what Ram wrote! He said there is no question about what God *could* do. But in light of the Scriptures providing a naturalistic explanation for the Flood, we must assume that this Flood had naturalistic causes, and did not require a "stupendous miracle."

    Originally posted by Walls
    But God said in plain language that He did cover the earth with water, and goes further to say that He has set boundaries for the water. On the New Earth God has three possibilities as the Omnipotent.
    1. He can again form a canopy of all water which would give the earth a very clement climate - a Greenhouse effect
    2. He can transport the water away from the planet - a veritable "drop" in the vastness of the universe
    3. He can make it disappear. He made all the matter in the universe out of nothing. Can He not reverse it?

    God does not deign to tell us. But that which He does tell us, let us believe it unless He obviously means a picture or Parable. Come, let us agree that OUR GOD IS ABLE TO DO WHAT HE SAYS - and it is our job to BELIEVE Him - not find a reason why it was not possible.
    Again, Ram did *not* say God is incapable of stupendous miracles. It is a question of interpretation, in the context of that culture. People at that time saw the heaven above and the earth below. The waters below were seas, lakes, and rivers. The waters above were the clouds, or fog. Stating the fact that God created this has nothing to do with the subject at hand, and I'm not clear why you even mention it?

    Since God's word says He finished with creating the universe after the 6th day, it doesn't seem logical that God is saying that He created 8 times the amount of water on earth in order to satisfy your need to interpret the Flood hyper-literally! It is way easier to understand all of the data with a local flood.

    That region has evidence of a great flood in this time period. In other parts of the world, there are creatures and habitat that have never been disturbed by a universal Flood.

    It makes much more sense to see God use the Flood story as an example for the human race as to what God intends for Man after the Fall. If there is not repentance, judgment will follow. And as the world gets worse, and rejects God's offer of clemency, universal judgment will come.

    I believe God took Noah and the creatures in his immediate environment and saved them to show the whole world that He had no intention of destroying man or the creatures on earth. On the other hand, rejecting and opposing God will result in severe judgment and death.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walls
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by randyk
    A "new creation" means, to me, not a re-creation of the universe, but rather, a "reform," or "regeneration," of the universe. I believe God when He said that He made the universe "in the beginning," and finished his work by the 6th day. A "new" heavens, and a "new" earth, can refer to something "renewed."

    I refer to your interpretation as "hyperliteral" because that is exactly how I see it from my perspective. The literal understanding would be understood as that contemporary culture would understand it, since it was written *in their culture.* They would not be speaking in astronomical terms. No, their sense of universality would have to do with experience--their experience in particular. Everything within the realm of their immediate experience would indicate "everything." Outside of their own personal experience are other things.

    If I looked up into the sky and saw a huge black cloud, I would run for cover. And as the rained poured down, I would express that "everything under the sky is flooding." That doesn't refer to the *globe* of the earth, but only my own personal experience.

    To be "hyperliteral" and "dogmatic" is to then require that my comments actually mean that the entire globe has to be saturated with water. It is putting words in my mouth, or interpreting those words in a way I didn't actually mean. Hence, your view to me is "hyperliteral."



    WRONG! That is the exact opposite of what Ram wrote! He said there is no question about what God *could* do. But in light of the Scriptures providing a naturalistic explanation for the Flood, we must assume that this Flood had naturalistic causes, and did not require a "stupendous miracle."



    Again, Ram did *not* say God is incapable of stupendous miracles. It is a question of interpretation, in the context of that culture. People at that time saw the heaven above and the earth below. The waters below were seas, lakes, and rivers. The waters above were the clouds, or fog. Stating the fact that God created this has nothing to do with the subject at hand, and I'm not clear why you even mention it?

    Since God's word says He finished with creating the universe after the 6th day, it doesn't seem logical that God is saying that He created 8 times the amount of water on earth in order to satisfy your need to interpret the Flood hyperliterally! It is way easier to understand all of the data with a local flood.

    That region has evidence of a great flood in this time period. In other parts of the world, there are creatures and habitat that have never been disturbed by a universal Flood.

    It makes much more sense to see God use the Flood story as an example for the human race as to what God intends for Man after the Fall. If there is not repentance, judgment will follow. And as the world gets worse, and rejects God's offer of clemency, universal judgment will come.

    I believe God took Noah and the creatures in his immediate environment and saved them to show the whole world that He had no intention of destroying man or the creatures on earth. On the other hand, rejecting and opposing God will result in severe judgment and death.
    OK. The matter of the volume of water has been thrashed out. Let the reader judge. I guess that according to Ramm, there was lots of high ground available for a portion of the world's population to survive on, but the murder rate for these choice bits of ground was rather high. Be that as it may, I would like only to comment on your (and Ramm's) allusions to a "cultural understand" of the Biblical language. This I fully reject because that would mean that God wrote His record ONLY for a certain culture and a certain time, leaving the rest of mankind to study the "culture" that had long since passed away. This is a standard argument of men claiming "higher revelation" who would like to lord over the laity. It was the tactic of the Roman Church. And it is the tactic of every cult leader. Moses did not write about the flood to one culture. He wrote it for every man who would ever open this most sold, and most studied Book in the world, IN EVERY AGE AND CULTURE.

    I vehemently maintain that the inspired record is so constructed that anyone with high-school language abilities IN ANY CULTURE ON EARTH can read the words of scripture and understand the plain statements. And any man or woman who humbly and prayerfully approaches God's Book with the intent to take it as it is, will receive the necessary light as to its meaning. That is why we need to take it as it is. Trying to outguess God as to the volume of water needed to cover Everest is the fruit of NOT BELIEVING what God has chosen to write.

    Leave a comment:


  • Keraz
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by randyk View Post
    I can't agree that serious discussions about what the Bible means is "useless," and it's a bit on the rude side for you to say that. However, I understand that it is useless for you. Why then do you thank Walls and me, if it's useless to you? Are you just being sarcastic? Are you entertained by it--at least that may have some redeeming value?

    But I still can't see your fascination with the solar flare phenomena? What makes you think that is what God will use? We see in Revelation references to earthquakes, lightnings, and blood waters? We hear of war--what's with the focus on emp's?

    If you have a revelation from God, there should be accompanying phenomena to prove your inspiration. One, it should edify--I don't see that happening. Two, we should see signs and wonders--I don't see that happening either.

    So either you're just leaping at a possible scenario, or you're being inspired by something other than God. If you have the right spirit, I should be able to see it! It doesn't help to call my conversation "useless," and your conversation "of God."
    I called your conversation with Walls interesting because I like to read such discussions. I called it useless because there is no way a final answer can be reached.

    I will continue to warn about a Coronal Mass Ejection as the means the Lord will change this world and set the scene for all the rest that must happen; leading up to the Return of Jesus. A CME of unprecedented magnitude, Joel 2:2b, Isaiah 30:26, Malachi 4:1, Psalms 50:1-3, is the only natural event that will literally fulfil all the cosmic and earthly effects as prophesied. It has to be a natural event, so the ungodly survivors can carry on in their godlessness and eventually worship the 'beast'.

    That many can't see this scenario, is also prophesied; Isaiah 29:9-12, Matthew 11:25, Jeremiah 6:10, +, and only after it happens, will most people finally understand. Isaiah 35:4-5, Jeremiah 23:20, Isaiah 32:3-4

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by Keraz View Post
    Thanks Walls and Randyk for your interesting but useless discussion about Noah's Flood.
    But what the Lord has told us He will use next time to reset our civilization, will affect all the globe. Isaiah 66:15-17, Zephaniah 3:8. 2 Peter 3:7

    Jeffweeder has the idea that this forthcoming worldwide disaster by fire, will come at the glorious Return of Jesus.
    That idea is refuted by the 3 plain descriptions of the Return, which never say that; Zechariah 14:3-7, Matthew 24:30, Revelation 19:11-21
    Your scriptures do not say they will occur at Jesus' Return. They do say things like; The Lord is coming in fire, but we know from many prophesies that He will not be seen on that terrible Day. Psalms 11:4-6, Habakkuk 3:4, and in 2 Thess 1:6-10 we see that Jesus will be revealed to His own people then, not to the world yet.
    I can't agree that serious discussions about what the Bible means is "useless," and it's a bit on the rude side for you to say that. However, I understand that it is useless for you. Why then do you thank Walls and me, if it's useless to you? Are you just being sarcastic? Are you entertained by it--at least that may have some redeeming value?

    But I still can't see your fascination with the solar flare phenomena? What makes you think that is what God will use? We see in Revelation references to earthquakes, lightnings, and blood waters? We hear of war--what's with the focus on emp's?

    If you have a revelation from God, there should be accompanying phenomena to prove your inspiration. One, it should edify--I don't see that happening. Two, we should see signs and wonders--I don't see that happening either.

    So either you're just leaping at a possible scenario, or you're being inspired by something other than God. If you have the right spirit, I should be able to see it! It doesn't help to call my conversation "useless," and your conversation "of God."

    Leave a comment:


  • Keraz
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Thanks Walls and Randyk for your interesting but useless discussion about Noah's Flood.
    But what the Lord has told us He will use next time to reset our civilization, will affect all the globe. Isaiah 66:15-17, Zephaniah 3:8. 2 Peter 3:7

    Jeffweeder has the idea that this forthcoming worldwide disaster by fire, will come at the glorious Return of Jesus.
    That idea is refuted by the 3 plain descriptions of the Return, which never say that; Zechariah 14:3-7, Matthew 24:30, Revelation 19:11-21
    Your scriptures do not say they will occur at Jesus' Return. They do say things like; The Lord is coming in fire, but we know from many prophesies that He will not be seen on that terrible Day. Psalms 11:4-6, Habakkuk 3:4, and in 2 Thess 1:6-10 we see that Jesus will be revealed to His own people then, not to the world yet.

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by jeffweeder View Post
    Gen 1

    9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. 10 God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good.


    There was enough water to cover all the dry land once upon a time. The fountains of the deep were opened releasing it in Noahs day.


    The main point of the flood was to wipe out all the ungodly.
    Actually, I think there is a finite amount of water that God put upon and around the earth. It assumes different forms but the volume is roughly the same. I believe Ramm when he said that it would require 8 times the volume of water to cover the highest mountain ranges. That is like creating the world all over again. And I don't believe God had to do that.

    And I don't find it logical that God would so completely destroy everything He created, which is what would happen if miles of water covered all of the vegetation and creatures. Even the fish would die with such an influx of water. Bottomfish would be crushed. Sealife would not have what it has today.

    Creatures have different habitat requirements, because God created a diversity of life to live everywhere. To homogenize the entire earth environment to all be water in effect creates a single habitat for all living things, creatures and vegetation. They would perish, not just because they could not live in that environment, but also because their food sources would be destroyed.

    No, I think God used Noah as a representation of what God plans to do with every man in the day of his judgment. He will either be enabled to remain, and live forever. Or, he will be removed forever, like a forest that is burned down.

    God will have a pure earth. And the Flood story illustrates that.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeffweeder
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by randyk

    Since God's word says He finished with creating the universe after the 6th day, it doesn't seem logical that God is saying that He created 8 times the amount of water on earth in order to satisfy your need to interpret the Flood hyperliterally! It is way easier to understand all of the data with a local flood.
    Gen 1

    9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. 10 God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good.


    There was enough water to cover all the dry land once upon a time. The fountains of the deep were opened releasing it in Noahs day.


    The main point of the flood was to wipe out all the ungodly.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeffweeder
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by Keraz View Post
    Where does the idea of the Lord's fiery wrath; after the GT, come from?

    The fiery judgment is Jesus coming like the days of Noah immediately after the GT.
    This time God intervenes in flaming fire and not water , to carry out his judgment and destruction on the ungodly.

    2pet 3
    3 Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.” 5 For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, 6 through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. 7 But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.


    2Thess 1
    5 This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering. 6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, 8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed—for our testimony to you was believed.



    Jesus is coming like the days of Noah to destroy the ungodly and glorify all those who have believed.
    Immediately after the GT we will all stand before his great white throne as shown below...,



    Rev 7
    9 After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands; 10 and they cry out with a loud voice, saying,
    “Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.” 11 And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures; and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12 saying,
    “Amen, blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might, be to our God forever and ever. Amen.”
    13 Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, “These who are clothed in the white robes, who are they, and where have they come from?” 14 I said to him, “My lord, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15 For this reason, they are before the throne of God; and they serve Him day and night in His temple; and He who sits on the throne will spread His tabernacle over them. 16 They will hunger no longer, nor thirst anymore; nor will the sun beat down on them, nor any heat; 17 for the Lamb in the center of the throne will be their shepherd, and will guide them to springs of the water of life; and God will wipe every tear from their eyes.”



    Rev 21
    Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea. 2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, 4 and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away.”
    5 And He who sits on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” And He said,
    “Write, for these words are faithful and true.” 6 Then He said to me, “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. 7 He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son.
    8 But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars,
    their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”



    The reference to Eternal fire in Matthew 25:41, is to the GWT Judgment. 'prepared for the devil and his angels..... Revelation 20:10

    I agree.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walls
    replied
    Re: The Prophetic Word

    Originally posted by randyk View Post
    Ramm continues:

    "When God tells the Israelites He will put the fear of them upon the people under the whole heaven, it refers to all the peoples known to the Israelites (Deut. 2:25). When Gen. 41:57 states that all countries came to Egypt to buy grain, it can only mean all peoples known to the Egyptians. Ahab certainly did not look for Elijah in every country of the earth even though the text says he looked for Elijah so thoroughly that he skipped no nation or kingdom (1 Kings 18:10). From the vantage point of the observer of the flood all mountains were covered, and all flesh died. We must concur that:

    'The language of the sacred historian by no means necessarily implies that the flood overspread the whole earth. Universal terms are frequently used in a partial and restricted sense in Scripture.' 90

    "The ark had a draught of about 15 cubits (Gen. 7:20) and so the writer inferred that the water rose that high above the mountains because the ark did not ground on any of them. The highest mountain in the region was Ararat at about 17,000 feet; the Himalayan range rises to 29,000 feet. Do those who defend a universal flood wish to assert that the waters mounted to a depth of six miles?...

    "(iii) There is no known geological data to support those who defend a universal flood...
    (b) The problems in connection with a universal flood are enormous. We can but summarize here the lengthy refutations found in commentaries and Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias. One point must be clearly understood before we commence these criticisms: the flood is recorded as a natural-supernatural occurrence. It does not appear as a pure and stupendous miracle. The natural and the supernatural work side by side and hand in hand. If one wishes to retain a universal flood, it must be understood that a series of stupendous miracles is required. Further, one cannot beg off with pious statements that God can do anything. We concur enthusiastically with Smith when he wrote:

    'That the Omnipotent could effect such a work [a universal flood], none can doubt; but we are not at liberty thus to invent miracles, and the narrative in the Book of Genesis plainly assigns two natural causes for the production of the diluvial waters.'

    "(I) There is the problem of the amount of water required by the universal flood... To cover the highest mountains would require eight times more water than we now have. It would have involved a great creation of water to have covered the entire globe, but no such creative act is hinted at in the Scriptures."

    Brother, I actually believe that you are assuming the narrative is to be interpreted hyper-literally, when no such use is required, either in contemporary language us or in the ancient culture's language. I believe the Scriptures indicate that the work of creation was done in 6 days, and that in Noah's time the creation of such a vast amount of water would not just constitute a miracle--it would constitute a 2nd creation!

    So I don't agree with your assignment of my beliefs as liberal or diminishing of God's word. I actually believe that you are engaging in a form of dogmatism, where your particular view of the Bible takes on more importance than other equally-important truths, such as Christian unity, Christ's love, and correctability. Unless you have these other things, you will use your view of Scriptures like an axe to bloody fellow believers, who equally hold to God's supernatural existence and miraculous abilities.
    OK. I hear you. But why the designation "hyper-literally". Is is not just plain "literal"? You have just posted two postings with your thoughts. May i assign them to allegory and say that you have not meant what you say?

    While you decide on that, where shall all the water of the oceans go on the New Earth (Rev.21:1)? Or has God made another mathematical miscalculation which He cannot cope with?

    Consider this. In Genesis 1:2 the earth was covered with water. God dispensed with the water by creating a canopy of water above the earth and the sea below. In Genesis 7 NOTHING NEW was needed. The Greenhouse Canopy crashed to earth in rain and the sea was stirred up beyond its God given boundaries. Has He not set the quantity and boundaries of the sea? Proverbs 8:23-29 says;

    23 "I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
    24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
    25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
    26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
    27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
    28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
    29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth
    :"


    You see brother, in one breath you and Ramm admit to God's ability and omnipotence, but in the next you say it was not logistically possible to cover the earth. But God said in plain language that He did cover the earth with water, and goes further to say that He has set boundaries for the water. On the New Earth God has three possibilities as the Omnipotent.
    1. He can again form a canopy of all water which would give the earth a very clement climate - a Greenhouse effect
    2. He can transport the water away from the planet - a veritable "drop" in the vastness of the universe
    3. He can make it disappear. He made all the matter in the universe out of nothing. Can He not reverse it?

    God does not deign to tell us. But that which He does tell us, let us believe it unless He obviously means a picture or Parable. Come, let us agree that OUR GOD IS ABLE TO DO WHAT HE SAYS - and it is our job to BELIEVE Him - not find a reason why it was not possible.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X