God is Only a Theory

hrmwrm said:
hey donno, there is written a few times in the bible of the stars falling from heaven, and one where it says they fall to earth. now, knowing what a star is, being our sun is one, and it's thousands of times bigger than the earth, how can they fall to earth without devouring it?
Click to expand...

A Bible passage completely misunderstood and taken out of context by you. The Bible verse that mentions "a third of the stars falling from the sky"... is a metaphorical context,,, pointing to the revolt of 1/3 of the angels rebelling against GOD!!!

You liked touting your beloved Book of Enoch,,, but don't even know what it is talking about. The chapters from Enoch that you provided very early in this thread... talked about angels being imprisioned. So the verse in Revelation about the Dragon sweeping 1/3 of the stars from the sky... is when the devil and 1/3 of the angels did the same.

Kinda hard to disprove something without knowing what you are talking about... isn't it??? Again WRM... try reading the Bible and understanding what it says. What do you have to lose,,, besides becoming more educated???
 
hrmwrm said:
now, just a passing thought. have you noticed when you look into space, that everything you see is self assembling? hydrogen falls in under gravity to produce stars, which produce elements at their cores, then spit out in a supernova, producing the power necessary to fuse those elements heavier than iron, and be re-assembled into smaller suns and planets.
Click to expand...

This is called "intelligent design". Again... it is scientifically proven that something can't come from nothing. If nothing existed in the beginning,,, then the the "big bang" never would have happened. Random particles didn't just form themselves out of nothing,,,to cause the big bang. SOMETHING, (somebody), had to form those particles out of nothing... in order for the big bang to happen.
 
Co'mon WRM. You started this thread,,, and I've been asking you to debate with me for a long time. Don was an unfortunate distraction. So let's get back to the original intent of the title of your thread.
 
04_Sport_LS said:
A Bible passage completely misunderstood and taken out of context by you. The Bible verse that mentions "a third of the stars falling from the sky"... is a metaphorical context,,, pointing to the revolt of 1/3 of the angels rebelling against GOD!!!

You liked touting your beloved Book of Enoch,,, but don't even know what it is talking about. The chapters from Enoch that you provided very early in this thread... talked about angels being imprisioned. So the verse in Revelation about the Dragon sweeping 1/3 of the stars from the sky... is when the devil and 1/3 of the angels did the same.

Kinda hard to disprove something without knowing what you are talking about... isn't it??? Again WRM... try reading the Bible and understanding what it says. What do you have to lose,,, besides becoming more educated???
Click to expand...

interesting insight, although I think a lot of Revelations and the visions from John may have to be taken as spoken metaphorically since many of these prophecies were describing many items not yet invented...I would take the above verse as describing a dragon as a military jet (or fleet of them) dropping bombs and firing missiles that when on contact, have massive explosions, where it could be perceived as "sweeping 1/3 of the stars from the sky"...

In the same sense, Nostradamus' descriptions of his visions were quite metaphorical as well...

...it's not to say I'm not a believer, because I indeed am, as i have some personal experiences combined with one particular 21 grams scientific theory by Dr Duncan McDougal in 1901 that convince me.
 
Last edited:
The thing most people either forget,,, or don't know... is that Revelation is not just an "end times" prophecy book. it speaks of thing that are... were... and will be, (not necessairily in that order).

You seem to miss that in the Verse mentioned... it says the stars were thown to earth. That is the point of contention that Hrmwrm is making. However... this happened at the beginning of the history of the Bible. So this is not a futuristic prophecy found in Revelation. It is speaking of past events at this time.

To continue with that in mind.... the woman mentioned,,, that is persued by the dragon... is Israel,,, and the child is the Messiah, (aka Jesus).

Read all of Revelation 12.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 12 - New International Version

And as far as Nostradamus... be very wary. Not all vision and prophecy come from Divine sources... no matter how metaphorical or literal something may appear.
 
04_Sport_LS said:
The thing most people either forget,,, or don't know... is that Revelation is not just an "end times" prophecy book. it speaks of thing that are... were... and will be, (not necessairily in that order).

You seem to miss that in the Verse mentioned... it says the stars were thown to earth. That is the point of contention that Hrmwrm is making. However... this happened at the beginning of the history of the Bible. So this is not a futuristic prophecy found in Revelation. It is speaking of past events at this time.

To continue with that in mind.... the woman mentioned,,, that is persued by the dragon... is Israel,,, and the child is the Messiah, (aka Jesus).

Read all of Revelation 12.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 12 - New International Version

And as far as Nostradamus... be very wary. Not all vision and prophecy come from Divine sources... no matter how metaphorical or literal something may appear.
Click to expand...


well, to clarify, I wasn't speaking nor debating about the truths of the scripture itself, just that there are interpretations based on what appear to be metaphors based on the knowledge of the times in which they were written...after reviewing, i wasn't even sure I was alluding to the specific actions themselves, but just the interpretations derived from them.
 
In regard to Revelation, the thing I try to keep in mind is that it is metaphoric. As such, all we can do is try to understand what John was talking about.

Those who state, categorically, 'the-only-true-meaning' are to be lumped in with those who angrily yell 'bible truths' at their TV audience just before asking for more (and more and more) money.

KS
 
Ima Luthier said:
well, to clarify, I wasn't speaking nor debating about the truths of the scripture itself, just that there are interpretations based on what appear to be metaphors based on the knowledge of the times in which they were written
Click to expand...

Not getting picky... but it sure seemed like it to me.

Ima Luthier said:
I would take the above verse as describing a dragon as a military jet (or fleet of them) dropping bombs and firing missiles that when on contact, have massive explosions, where it could be perceived as "sweeping 1/3 of the stars from the sky"...
Click to expand...

There is interpretaion of a verse by itself... then there is the study of the Bible as a whole... which gives proper interpretation of Scripture.

The term is called Exegesis.

Google

As one example verse... look at Job 38:7

7When the morning stars sang together
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

In different places in the Bible... "morning stars" and "sons of God",,, are in reference to Angels. This proves context with Revelation chapter 12.
 
cammerfe said:
In regard to Revelation, the thing I try to keep in mind is that it is metaphoric.
Click to expand...

You're right Cam,,, and some of that metaphor is found in many other places in the Bible. But as in other places in the Bible... some of Revelation is also literal.

As Ima suggested... some of it is up to interpretation,,, but the interpretaion has to be examined by/through the context of the whole Bible.
 
04_Sport_LS said:
You're right Cam,,, and some of that metaphor is found in many other places in the Bible. But as in other places in the Bible... some of Revelation is also literal.

As Ima suggested... some of it is up to interpretation,,, but the interpretation has to be examined by/through the context of the whole Bible.
Click to expand...


Indeed, but with many translations from the original text (Aramaic, i believe?) that would lead to interpretations from one language to the next, and missing/deteriorated scrolls that are lost forever, I think the context and the learning point of the whole Christian Bible is relatively clear to a believer. The literal context may be more of a universally spiritual guideline that exists within all of us and is understood by those who wish to live by God's teachings and examples, and exists as a good and clear conscience.
 
I sometimes call myself an 'agnostic' within the actual meaning---'One who doesn't know'. I do my best, and always have at least a 'mustard grain of faith'. Since I believe the Revelation to be metaphoric, I have chosen to focus on those things that can be understood in a more literal way.

When I was in school, I could always ask friends who had mastered the archaic languages to help me understand whatever topic I was studying. And I quickly learned not to take a phrase and try to build a system of belief upon it. Hermeneutics, using several commentaries, seems to me to be the only way to understand whatever I'm studying.

KS
 
Ima Luthier said:
Indeed, but with many translations from the original text (Aramaic, i believe?) that would lead to interpretations from one language to the next, and missing/deteriorated scrolls that are lost forever
Click to expand...

Yes... original OT was in Aramaic and Hebrew,,, then eventually translated into Greek. Most translations are based off the original text,,, and compared with other known versions of the original text.

While some of it may be lost,,, you forget the purpose of the Scribes. They were to record "every jot a tittle" word for word and symbol for symbol. This is why they gave Jesus such a hard time. They knew what the words "said" ,,, but missed what it "meant".
 
04_Sport_LS said:
Yes... original OT was in Aramaic and Hebrew,,, then eventually translated into Greek. Most translations are based off the original text,,, and compared with other known versions of the original text.
Click to expand...

I think it could be said that if Aramaic, which was not a single language but a group of related languages, may even have its lost translations and I would almost wager that many modern biblical texts may be derived from the other languages it was translated to (i.e. Greek, Latin, etc). Our world has too long of a history for even language scholars from an ancient language (since there has been a defining difference of "Old" vs "New" Aramaic) to 100% agree on every linguistic interpretation. I guess its up to the believer to choose the ones that make the most sense to them...In my opinion, spirituality is not absolute within just the scriptures, but combined with faith and conscience.

04_Sport_LS said:
While some of it may be lost,,, you forget the purpose of the Scribes. They were to record "every jot a tittle" word for word and symbol for symbol. This is why they gave Jesus such a hard time. They knew what the words "said" ,,, but missed what it "meant".
Click to expand...

not lost on me, indeed.
 
I can't 100% agree with what you said. In truth,,, I question what you say... because you have mentioned "spirituality" more than once... but you don't talk about "Faith". Spirituality... is much different than Faith. In truth... the ideology of spirituality blurrs the lines of Faith.

Welcome to the amalgomated idea of the "new religion". The modern age of "today"... has replaced "Faith" with "spirituality". The new religion says... believe in what you believe in,,, and nevermind what God says is true!!! So just ignore the Bible... and believe what you want to believe.

Yeah... sarcasm,,, but it's very poignant. And people wonder why HrmWrm started this thread??? Contrary to what most people think... I see why he is an antagonist. He points out the diversity in Christian beliefs, (when some beliefs aren't Christian),,, and asks how such a diverse God can support all theology.

Not everyone can be right... and not everyone can be wrong. The TRUTH is some where,,, and it involves question of ideas to find the truth.

HrmWrm ain't as dumb or obstinant as people think. At least Don is gone at this point, (maybe). Not sure about that.
 
04_Sport_LS said:
I can't 100% agree with what you said. In truth,,, I question what you say... because you have mentioned "spirituality" more than once... but you don't talk about "Faith". Spirituality... is much different than Faith. In truth... the ideology of spirituality blurrs the lines of Faith.

Welcome to the amalgomated idea of the "new religion". The modern age of "today"... has replaced "Faith" with "spirituality". The new religion says... believe in what you believe in,,, and nevermind what God says is true!!! So just ignore the Bible... and believe what you want to believe.

Yeah... sarcasm,,, but it's very poignant. And people wonder why HrmWrm started this thread??? Contrary to what most people think... I see why he is an antagonist. He points out the diversity in Christian beliefs, (when some beliefs aren't Christian),,, and asks how such a diverse God can support all theology.

Not everyone can be right... and not everyone can be wrong. The TRUTH is some where,,, and it involves question of ideas to find the truth.

HrmWrm ain't as dumb or obstinant as people think. At least Don is gone at this point, (maybe). Not sure about that.
Click to expand...

I'm not questioning the word of God, but man's "interpretation" of it. I'm a believer, have been for all of my life save for a year or so in my late teens (at a time I was questioning God's existence) when a near death experience shook me to my core and I returned to FAITH. BUT, man has been God's representative since man's creation, however diverse humanity has trickled, which to a large degree, has diluted the Truth. Outside of the Ten Commandments, basically humanity's guiding principles as directly written by God, everything else is documented by man. In your statement, I interpret that you separate "faith" and "spirituality" (please correct if I am wrong), but to me there is really no duality in it, one is as much a part of the other. God is for all, but how we choose to come to him may not take the same path...

One has to think that not every soul that passed away before the times of Christ and Abraham is condemned to hell because they were not Christian nor Jewish...there's so much we do not know, that one book written by a man's interpretation of God's word that has been passed down through multiple iterations that so many sects follow (the dilution I mentioned earlier, if you will), and teach differently. "Religion" as a concept is man-made, "spirituality" and "faith" is inherent (unless you are atheist, in which all bets are off).

You seem to want to debate on this and feel very absolute about it because of the scripts of the past, but with those scripts being subject to errors in the scriptors' interpretations and the subsequent writings since then, I have to take the approach to go by what I feel is right and the commandments in conjunction with the generalized teachings of the bible (there are some things some prophets and prominents have espoused to which I question their validity) as an "operation manual for humanity", and my conscience/spirit helps me do that, which I do believe is guided by God. He instilled a sense of right and wrong, but also gave us the free will to choose which path to follow, and that path brings us back to him or further into the darkness.

I totally respect your commitment to how you follow your conscience and faith (and ask the same in return), I just see it a bit differently based on my experiences.

if any grammatical/spelling errors, please forgive, I woke up and checked my email to see this response first thing, haven't had breakfast (i.e. COFFEE) yet.
 
I just clicked the hyperlink and read what it had to say. I'm reminded of an episode in a biblical discussion group I was part of some years ago. One of the 'regulars' brought a guest. He considered himself to be very learned and made a statement that was parallel to the one in the link.

I asked him, since we have a multiple of translations, to tell us which one we are to take literally. His answer was, "Why, the King James, of course." I immediately thought of 1 Corinthians 13. In King James we are told to have 'charity'. We now know that in modern parlance the KJ 'charity' is better understood to be 'brotherly love'.

The Bible is a mass of such conundrums. That's where my 'mustard seed' comes in.

KS
 
Ima,

Glad you find Hermeneutics interesting. It's where the idea, study and teaching of Exegesis and Eisigesis come from. Again,,, it's all about Biblical context vs personal interpretation.

What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?

I won't take anything away from whatever personal experiences that you have experienced,,, that have brought you closer to God!!!

However... it does still concern me that you talk more about "spirituality" than Faith.

Also... you seem to question the legitimacy of the Biblical translations we have in this day and age,,, and seem to feel they may have been corrupted or lost "true translation" thousands of years ago.

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls,,, prove that the original text of the Bible is legitimate. Along with what St. Catherine's Monistary also has.

The thing you need to understand and remember,,, is that the beginning of the modern Bible came from the ORAL traditions of the Hebrew/Jewish people. Those oral traditions are called the Talmud. What you need to understand about this... is that certain people were specially selected to memorize those oral stories, (word for word),,, from their elders that had learned them from their elders, (word for word).

This is not something specifically special about the Hebrews/Jews. Some study will show that there are some "back woods" tribes in remote parts of Africa and other places in the world.... that STILL do this.

So the first 12 chapters of the Book of Genesis... are DEFINITELY Talmudic, (oral only... but memorized word for word). Jews back in Jesus's day, (and before and after), were expected to memorize and KNOW them. Thus Jude's reference to Enoch in the Biblical New Testament.

Even Jesus referenced parts of the Old Testament,,, knowing they were TRUE.

IF you believe that Jesus is "God in the flesh",,, then to say that the Bible is not accurate... then you are doubting that God has kept his oral traditions and written word accurate over time.

By the time we get to chapter 13 in Genesis,,, there starts to become some sort of written record... according to archeological findings. By the time we get to the Book of Exodus... God had told Moses to keep a "written record". Thus the starting of the Hebrew Scribes.

Again... the ONLY purpose of the Scribes,,, was to put the Talmud into words... and to record all past, present, (from their perspective), and future events throught the history of the Hebrews/Jews.

This is why I previously mentioned "every jot a tittle". The scribes were trained to accurately record EVERYTHING of the history of their people.

Even Jesus mentions "every jot and tittle". A quick Google search led me to "guess where"? ;)

What is a jot? What is a tittle?

Yeah,,, the site above can be my "go to" site,,, but I haven't read anything there that raises a "red flag".

Don't know if you have read the past 500+ posts,,, but their used to be a Jehovah Witness on this thread that liked to twist many Scriptures to his own idea... in an attempt to prosylitize others to the JW beleifs.

Somebody on here... went "15 rounds" with the JW... and when the JW tried to twist the chronolgy of the books of Kings and Chronicles into a convoluted mess,,, they contacted the "got questions" website... with their typed rebuttal against the JW. They were told "nice job"... and that the rebuttal against the JW,,, was accurate.

Not blowing anyones horn,,, just that proper study of Biblical Scripture... in PROPER CONTEXT, (Exegesis),,, will lead to accurate understanding of the Bible... which can help a person with their INDIVIDUAL relationship with God.
 
Ima,

Glad you find Hermeneutics interesting. It's where the idea, study and teaching of Exegesis and Eisigesis come from. Again,,, it's all about Biblical context vs personal interpretation.

What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?

I won't take anything away from whatever personal experiences that you have experienced,,, that have brought you closer to God!!!

However... it does still concern me that you talk more about "spirituality" than Faith.

Also... you seem to question the legitimacy of the Biblical translations we have in this day and age,,, and seem to feel they may have been corrupted or lost "true translation" thousands of years ago.

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls,,, prove that the original text of the Bible is legitimate. Along with what St. Catherine's Monistary also has.

The thing you need to understand and remember,,, is that the beginning of the modern Bible came from the ORAL traditions of the Hebrew/Jewish people. Those oral traditions are called the Talmud. What you need to understand about this... is that certain people were specially selected to memorize those oral stories, (word for word),,, from their elders that had learned them from their elders, (word for word).

This is not something specifically special about the Hebrews/Jews. Some study will show that there are some "back woods" tribes in remote parts of Africa and other places in the world.... that STILL do this.

So the first 12 chapters of the Book of Genesis... are DEFINITELY Talmudic, (oral only... but memorized word for word). Jews back in Jesus's day, (and before and after), were expected to memorize and KNOW them. Thus Jude's reference to Enoch in the Biblical New Testament.

Even Jesus referenced parts of the Old Testament,,, knowing they were TRUE.

IF you believe that Jesus is "God in the flesh",,, then to say that the Bible is not accurate... then you are doubting that God has kept his oral traditions and written word accurate over time.

By the time we get to chapter 13 in Genesis,,, there starts to become some sort of written record... according to archeological findings. By the time we get to the Book of Exodus... God had told Moses to keep a "written record". Thus the starting of the Hebrew Scribes.

Again... the ONLY purpose of the Scribes,,, was to put the Talmud into words... and to record all past, present, (from their perspective), and future events throught the history of the Hebrews/Jews.

This is why I previously mentioned "every jot a tittle". The scribes were trained to accurately record EVERYTHING of the history of their people.

Even Jesus mentions "every jot and tittle". A quick Google search led me to "guess where"? ;)

What is a jot? What is a tittle?

Yeah,,, the site above can be my "go to" site,,, but I haven't read anything there that raises a "red flag".

Don't know if you have read the past 500+ posts,,, but their used to be a Jehovah Witness on this thread that liked to twist many Scriptures to his own idea... in an attempt to prosylitize others to the JW beleifs.

Somebody on here... went "15 rounds" with the JW... and when the JW tried to twist the chronolgy of the books of Kings and Chronicles into a convoluted mess,,, they contacted the "got questions" website... with their typed rebuttal against the JW. They were told "nice job"... and that the rebuttal against the JW,,, was accurate.

Not blowing anyones horn,,, just that proper study of Biblical Scripture... in PROPER CONTEXT, (Exegesis),,, will lead to accurate understanding of the Bible... which can help a person with their INDIVIDUAL relationship with God.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 102 (members: 1, guests: 101)
Back
Top