Danger: History and Science in the Bible

[M2]

I thought Claude was quite unique in his interest of Fibonacci series and Mandelbrot sets etc. But I see I was quite mistaken. It's all Greek to me. But I'm glad that you guys are enjoying this topic.

Marcia

[sfortescue]

Hi Maricia!

...

  Happy 25th wedding anniversary to Claude and Marsha!!!
    God's richest blessing on your marriage and family!!!

                                                         Mark C.

... probably told you about our anniversary.  Well, you'll have to write to me again as it is on the 23rd Sept.

Thanks Mark and Lord bless,
Marcia (not Maricia or Marsha)

P.S.  At more than an hour late, perhaps I should have just said happy birthday.

[vernecarty]

You guys are just making it harder for me to understand how you ended up following GG! You probably each have about 40 IQ points on him!  And a good 75 over DG!

Scott

In general, I find it easier to solve Math problems than to figure out whether someone is telling me the truth or not.  I like Math because it's honest and straightforward.  I have a hard time understanding people, but I have to try.

Scott raises an important point. What he is saying underscores the fact that what was lacking in many of those around GG was not so much discernment as it was courage. We failed to act despite what we knew. I speak this to my own shame...

Verne---
Thanks for those statistics. But you know, the guy I have to say that I truly admire, having no computers to work with etc. was John Strong, author of "Strongs Exhaustive Concordance". That whole work was done literally by hand. He did not do it alone, doling out some of the work to others, but he did a large majority of it by himself. Can you imagine the labor involved in putting that massive work together? And if he could see what we are able to do now with computers he would probably fall down and cry thinking of all the hours he missed out on where he could have been fishing instead.(just kidding).

--joe

I owe the man a great debt. The recent availablity of over 2 Gigs of processing power notwithstanding, I still like to thumb throught my "big red monster" every now and then...a true tour de force...

I thought Claude was quite unique in his interest of Fibonacci series and Mandelbrot sets etc. But I see I was quite mistaken. It's all Greek to me. But I'm glad that you guys are enjoying this topic.

Marcia

More like Italian and French...!

Verne

[lenore]

MAY 31ST: 11:07 PM EST:
This was taken from the  Danger Math and Science in the Bible Thread: It was from the very first post.



THE POINT TO THIS POST IS:
We need to interpret the Bible ourselves for today and realize that humans wrote it at a particular place and time and within a culture that no longer exists.  In Genesis is says that the day Adam and Eve ate the fruit they would die.  We do not take that literally and INTERPRET that death as spiritual.  We no longer greet one another with a holy kiss even though Paul tells the saints to.  We no longer own slaves and the role of women has thankfully changed in society.  The Apostle Peter says we are to obey those in authority over us but in Acts he stood against the authorities.  The point to this paragraph is we must interpret the Bible ourselves and decide what God’s will is for us.  He has given us a brain and He wants us to use it so that life can be "a continual experience of discovery and evaluation and rediscovery."

My Question has anyone ever read books by
"GRANT JEFFERIES"
He makes a very interesting argument about codes being in the BIBLE:

Especially if you can get pass, the fact he predicted that  Jesus would return in 1987.
Otherwise the research team, he spoke of was very well written.
Though this would interest you Mathmatical, Computerize, and Science Buffs out there.
In one of this author books, he speaks on Mathematics , Science, History, etc in the Bible.
It just might interest you in seeing what he says.

Just passing on some information.

[outdeep]

Someone lent me "The Bible Code" by Michael Drosnin and Doron Vitstum that was along that line.  The premise was that in looking for phrases in the Bible in a manner similar to a "word search" game, modern events were predicted.  

I never read the book so I can't give an educated opinion.  I lived through an age where we sincerely believed that codes in the Bible made Henry Kissinger the anti-Christ and that when 10 nations joined the European Common Market the rapture would happen immediately (there have been over 10 nations in the ECM for some time now).  

So, this type of book didn't exactly grab me.  Others apparently liked it as it was on the NYT bestsellers list.  On the other hand, many thought the Prayer of Jabez was the cat's pajamas, too.

[al Hartman]

  ...this type of book didn't exactly grab me.  Others apparently liked it as it was on the NYT bestsellers list.  On the other hand, many thought the Prayer of Jabez was the cat's pajamas, too.

     By & large, the New York Times bestsellers list is not the best guide to edifying godly literature.  Not as the world giveth give I unto you.

     ...just an observation...

al

[vernecarty]

 For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents:


It is always fun to go back and read some of the old threads.
It will never cease to amaze me how som epeople calling themselves Christians, and who claim to believe the reliability of the Scriptural message of salvation through faith in Christ, can in the same breath make the case that the Scriptural record is filled with lies and inaccuracies.
Will Jones was one such interesting person.
I was reading my Bible in the book of Exodus and as I came across the passgae describing what the Egyptian sorcerers did I found myself podering the question:

"Do I really believe this happened?"

The answer was of course an instant and unequivocal YES!

How is it that people considering themselves of great spiritual and intellectual erudition appear to lack the simple understanding that no intelligent Christian would subject the Word of God to the constraints of a mere scientific paradigm, and that therfore such a paradigm must necessarily fail in its attempts to fully explain what clearly transcends it??!!
An amusing blast from the past...!   
Verne

[M2]

For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents:


It is always fun to go back and read some of the old threads.
It will never cease to amaze me how som epeople calling themselves Christians, and who claim to believe the reliability of the Scriptural message of salvation through faith in Christ, can in the same breath make the case that the Scriptural record if filled with lies and inaccuracies.
Will Jones was one such interesting person.
I was reading my Bible in the book of Exodus and as I came across the passgae describing what the Egyptian sorcerers did I found myself podering the question:

"Do I really believe this happened?"

The answer was of course and instant and unequivocal YES!

How is it that people considering themselves of great spiritual and intellectual erudition appear to lack the simple understanding that no intelligent Christian would subject the Word of God to the constraints of a mere scientific paradigm, and that therfore such a paradigm must necessarily fail in its attempts to fully explain what clearly transcends it??!!
An amusing blast from the past...!   
Verne

Maybe it is a simple matter of your mis-understanding Will's point.
Maybe it is because Will is "no intelligent Christian".
Maybe it is because Will simply disagrees with you on certain matters.

I know Will Jones from his time in the Ottawa assembly.  He is a believer.  He was 'involved' in the campus ministry.  He was smart enough to not allow the leaders to 'control' his life decisions and leave the assembly.  He lived in a 'training home' and yet he did not succumb to the assembly mentality.

Marcia

[lenore]

Maybe it is a simple matter of your mis-understanding Will's point.
Maybe it is because Will is "no intelligent Christian".
Maybe it is because Will simply disagrees with you on certain matters.

I know Will Jones from his time in the Ottawa assembly.  He is a believer.  He was 'involved' in the campus ministry.  He was smart enough to not allow the leaders to 'control' his life decisions and leave the assembly.  He lived in a 'training home' and yet he did not succumb to the assembly mentality.

Marcia

Believing the Bible at as its Worth is a gift of faith.  But in Matthew Jesus tells us to consider the cost of following him. In considering the cost, I believe Jesus wants us to ask him the hard questions, questions that would interfer with the ultimate decision to follow him.  Will sounds like a Christian with a very personal relationship with Jesus, An emotional passionate Christian.
Even the intellectual Christian will asked Jesus and seek advice to the burning questions.
I love reading Revelation, I can understand Revelations because I take Revelations at its face value. Simple I believe what it says. I do not have to deeply analyze it inside and out. Yet I have been told that not the way to study Revelation. There are many who will argue the bible in certain doctrines. Like pre, during, post tribulation rapture.  It is good to get insight of what other people are thinking, Then with Gods telling you giving you the peace of mind and heart, God will ultimately show the individual heart which way is the true way of faith.  Certain doctrine like when the rapture is going happen is not an issue the issue to be firm in is Salvation. Who Jesus is. and what He represents. He is the Son of God, who came to earth as a human baby, grew up with one purpose to offer the permanet sacrifice on the cross for my sins, even though I was not worth or deserved it, making a way for me to receive salvation, and reconcilation with my Heavenly Father. Jesus is my Lord, and King. That is what is important. There are certain believe of the Bible that are absolute truth, then because of the different branches of the Christian faith, there are certain doctrine (usually  man made), that we can agree to disagree for the unity of Faith in Jesus Christ.  I think until Christian stop this petty bickering, over issues that separate us, and start respecting and uniting over Salvation truths , then how will the lost world ever believe us.
I think there is no harm in exploring or questioning. That way we can put the hand to the plow and not look back, because we have the peace that Jesus is the answer, and our journey of faith has been plowed into fertile ground.
Sorry if I took an writer licence in trying to make my point.

Lenore

[vernecarty]

Maybe it is a simple matter of your mis-understanding Will's point.

What exactly is there to mis-understand? He writes quite clearly.

Maybe it is because Will is "no intelligent Christian".

Clearly more intelligent that the average person.

Maybe it is because Will simply disagrees with you on certain matters.

Now just how silly can you get? 
Anyone denying the inerrancy of Scripture does not simply disagree with Verne Carty Marcia, and you know it.

I know Will Jones from his time in the Ottawa assembly.  He is a believer.  He was 'involved' in the campus ministry.  He was smart enough to not allow the leaders to 'control' his life decisions and leave the assembly.  He lived in a 'training home' and yet he did not succumb to the assembly mentality.

Therefore...??!

I think there is no harm in exploring or questioning. That way we can put the hand to the plow and not look back, because we have the peace that Jesus is the answer, and our journey of faith has been plowed into fertile ground.
Sorry if I took an writer licence in trying to make my point.

Lenore

I think it depends on how you question and/or explore.
It is one thing to disagree on what we believe a passage of Scripture to be actually saying.
It is another thing to say I fully understand what the Bible says but deem it scientifically and historically erroneous.
Will made it quite clear that this was his position, Marcia's obfuscation notwithstanding.
Anyone one who postulates that the Bible is fallible has no basis on which to claim saving faith; I don't care what they call themselves. Surprising that this should even be a matter of debate among Christians.

Verne

[al Hartman]

Anyone one who postulates that the Bible is fallible has no basis on which to claim saving faith; I don't care what they call themselves. Surprising that this should even be a matter of debate among Christians.

Verne

Now, Verne, you know that there is nobody more agreeable than I .  But I think your statement above over-extends itself.  The basis of saving faith is belief in the Lord Jesus Christ, not in the entire Bible.  As Christ is the living Word of God, saving faith and belief in the Word are the same, but learning to recognize the validity of all scripture as also being the Word, may take considerable time, and MUST be preceeded by saving faith-- is, in fact, impossible without it.

My personal faith in the Bible had faltered during my "wilderness" years, and you, dear Brother,did not deem me unsaved but were instrumental in bringing me back to the Truth.  I may have never thanked you for that-- please allow me to do so now...

In Christ,
al

[vernecarty]

Now, Verne, you know that there is nobody more agreeable than I .  But I think your statement above over-extends itself.  The basis of saving faith is belief in the Lord Jesus Christ, not in the entire Bible.  As Christ is the living Word of God, saving faith and belief in the Word are the same, but learning to recognize the validity of all scripture as also being the Word, may take considerable time, and MUST be preceeded by saving faith-- is, in fact, impossible without it.

My personal faith in the Bible had faltered during my "wilderness" years, and you, dear Brother,did not deem me unsaved but were instrumental in bringing me back to the Truth.  I may have never thanked you for that-- please allow me to do so now...

In Christ,
al

You are right Al. The statment may have been too strong.
I still really have trouble believing someone is saved who thinks the Bible contains lies and inaccurate information.
While you are right that we cannot judge the condition of another person's heart, I still do not understand why a person who believes the Bible errs on other subjects, can nottheless be absolutely trusted in what it teaches about the way of salvation. I think true salvaton brings an awareness of the divine nature of the Holy Scriptures.
It may be that the proper way to view such folk is as advised in Romans:


Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. Roman 14:1

I will tell you frankly that of all the people I have met claiming to be Christians yet holding the position that there are some teachings of the Bible to be rejected, invariablly the issue turned out to be that the Bible disagreed with their position on some moral issue. Without exception, it was Biblical antagonism to some viewpoint held, and which would have to be conceded if indeed the Bible spoke unerringly on all matters. I could be wrong about this I admit, but my own expereince suggests otherwise. Thanks for the thought-provoking post Al. I appreciate it.
Verne

[M2]

Al, you make a very good point.

Verne, I read the top post on this thread.  I understood that Will was commenting that we do not take everything literally and should not be 'dogmatic'.  E.g. Do you greet others with a holy kiss?  Do you take a little wine for your stomach?  We have the Word to guide us and intelligence to help us make up our minds for ourselves.  That is what I understood he was attempting to communicate.

Blessings,
Marcia

[vernecarty]

Al, you make a very good point.

Verne, I read the top post on this thread.  I understood that Will was commenting that we do not take everything literally and should not be 'dogmatic'.  E.g. Do you greet others with a holy kiss?  Do you take a little wine for your stomach?  We have the Word to guide us and intelligence to help us make up our minds for ourselves.  That is what I understood he was attempting to communicate.

Blessings,
Marcia

Too bad that you are trying to speak for Will.
Your stated interpretation does not represent his position and that would be evident if you had followed the fairly lengthy debate he and I had. I now regret deleting those posts.
Will Jones believes, and stated as much via specific examples, that the Bible contains errors of scientific fact.
He dismisses the Genesis record of the creation as neither consistent nor accurate so I am glad that you have such confidence of his faith. I would ask, faith in what?
Verne


p.s. Here are the man's own words Marcia so I am not sure exactly what you read...

Conclusion

There is nothing in the Bible about scripture being literally true, or infallible or inerrant. These are ideas that have been imposed on the Bible by Christians in order to defend certain interpretations of it. To argue that the Bible is literally true, word for word, and not in some places figuratively true or allegorically true, is to interpret the Bible. To assert that the Bible is the infallible word of God, as though it is fixed in time and does not require any translation or interpretation, is to defend an interpretation of the Bible that flies in the face of church history.

Christians continue to defend the inerrancy and the infallibility of scripture, but this is an interpretation that has little evidence to sustain it and is by no means a plain reading of the text. Any reader of the Bible can find factual inconsistencies.  For instance, the first three gospels report that Jesus was crucified the day after Passover, but the gospel of John has Jesus crucified on Passover.  Similarly, the first three gospels report that Jesus cleansed the temple of the money changers a few days before he was arrested and put on trial, whereas in the gospel of John this story is placed at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus. 

There are also many examples of teachings in the New Testament that are inconsistent.  In Matthew 5:17-20 Jesus teaches that he has not come to abolish Jewish law, and in Romans 10:4 Paul teaches that Christ came to abolish Jewish law. Which of these contradictory teachings is inerrant? The church has come to agree with Paul and thus has chosen to ignore the literal meaning of the teaching about Jewish law in the gospel of Matthew. The church has long dealt with contradictions in the Bible by interpreting some passages literally and other passages as figurative or spiritual in meaning.  For instance, teachings in the gospel of Matthew and elsewhere in the New Testament about keeping Jewish law are interpreted to mean keeping the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law.  This interpretation is based on a reading of the entire New Testament, which includes Paul's letters and other gospel texts that present Jesus violating the law for the sake of a greater good.

We cannot read and understand Christian scripture without interpreting it.  Therefore, it is misleading to claim that the Bible is the literal word of God, or the infallible word of God, or the inerrant word of God. God did not dictate the Bible. Human beings wrote the books of the Bible in their own languages, using words that had meanings in their own time and place. Centuries later, when the Bible was translated into English from manuscripts that were not original, scholars interpreted the meaning of its ancient languages so that you and I might understand passages written in Hebrew for Israelites and in Greek for Christians.

Christians trust in the Bible as the word of God, but the church throughout history has had the responsibility of discerning what that word is. The Scots Confession affirmed in 1560 that "we dare not receive or admit any interpretation which is contrary to any principal point of our faith, or to any other plain text of Scripture, or to the rule of love." We should be guided by these words and by the history of biblical interpretation that is central to the Reformed tradition of Christian faith.

Well...?

p.s By the way, his examples of the supposed facutal inconsistencies in the gospels betray what is generally the case about people who hold his position, namely, he does not know his Bible nearly as well as he thinks he does...there are prefectly sound and reasonable answers to those questions...known by any first year Bible student....
It is really also remarkable that he equates allegorical and figurative language with factual inconsistency 
That the Bible employs the former is not at all in dispute!

[moonflower2]

I will tell you frankly that of all the people I have met claiming to be Christians yet holding the position that there are some teachings of the Bible to be rejected, invariablly the issue turned out to be that the Bible disagreed with their position on some moral issue. Without exception, it was Biblical antaogonism to some viewpoint held, and which would have to be conceded if indeed the Bible spoke unerringly on all matters. I could be wrong about this I admit, but my own expereince suggests otherwise.

Verne

I have come across the same phenomenon with people who want to justify in some way what they are doing, whether they are believers or not. They only way they can do that is to say that the Bible has had the defilement of the human touch. Interesting thing about that, is that if the Bible is fallible, why doesn't it say what they want it to?