WalterTrull
Godfella
The problem I see is a misunderstanding of time. It doesn't actually exist. If you put all the creation stuff in the bible in present tense, it makes more sense. "In the beginning is the word". Very, very cool.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Treating man-made religious texts as "God's words" is idolatry. It's no different than treating man-sculpted religious idols as though they possess divine powers. The Bible does not claim to have been written by God. The Bible does not proclaim itself to have been dictated by God, nor does it claim to be "inerrant". The substitution of the term "word" in the Bible replaces the ancient Greek work "logos", which did not ever refer to divinely authoritative text. In fact, it never referred to text at all. It referred to a kind of divine idealized 'blueprint' within which material existence manifests.
The literalist's claims that the Bible contains "God's words" is not even a valid claim according to the Bible, itself. Nor is it a claim validated by any other means.
The problem I see is a misunderstanding of time. It doesn't actually exist. If you put all the creation stuff in the bible in present tense, it makes more sense. "In the beginning is the word". Very, very cool.
Many millions of Christians do not believe the Bible to contain "God's words". In fact, most, I would imagine. Inerrant literalists are a minority among Christians. Most Christians believe the Bible is exactly what it claims to be: a divinely inspired and useful theological and spiritual guide, written by men.You're a Christian who doesn't believe any of the Bible is God's word?
Many millions of Christians do not believe the Bible to contain "God's words". In fact, most, I would imagine. Inerrant literalists are a minority among Christians. Most Christians believe the Bible is exactly what it claims to be: a divinely inspired and useful theological and spiritual guide, written by men.
Also, I am not a religious Christian.
FYI: debates for a single faith should be in the same faith debate section.1) This is intended for those who say they are Christians but try to explain away the creation version in Genesis using “interpretation” and/or “translation” issues in order to reconcile with non-believers.
2) The issue of a normal 24 hour day as opposed to a period of time.
“God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” (Genesis 1:5, NASB95)
3) Every place in Genesis with the subject of creation uses the noun, common, singular, absolute of “yom”. Whereas, when used as a time other than evening and morning, it is not NC-SA. As an example…
View attachment 18516 View attachment 18517
4) Notice the Morphology changes from noun, common, singular, absolute to noun, common, masculine, plural, construct. Are the Hebraist contending there is not a difference in meaning?
5) In addition, I find the following chart interesting.
View attachment 18518
“Yom NC-SA - day (sunset) n. — a unit of time from sunset until the next sunset; including evening and morning.”
6) When taken in like context with other scriptures, “yom” NC-SA is used 1292 times, whereas, when used as meaning something other than evening and morning, a different morphology is used, at least from what I have been able to find.
7) Graphs and quotes are from…
Faithlife Corporation. (2017). day (sunset) (Version 6.14 SR-5) [Computer software]. Logos Bible Software Bible Sense Lexicon. Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation. Retrieved from https://ref.ly/logos4/Senses;KeyId=ws.day.n.01
No. It contains some men's words about how they experienced and understood their "God", in their time. If we find their stories and editorials about God useful to us, today, that's fine. If we don't, that's fine as well. There is no logical reason for us to idolize their texts, except, perhaps, if we're trying to use this false idolization to dress ourselves up in the illusion of divine authority that we get from such a claim.You don't think Exodus contains God's words?
1) This is intended for those who say they are Christians but try to explain away the creation version in Genesis using “interpretation” and/or “translation” issues in order to reconcile with non-believers.
2) The issue of a normal 24 hour day as opposed to a period of time.
“God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” (Genesis 1:5, NASB95)
3) Every place in Genesis with the subject of creation uses the noun, common, singular, absolute of “yom”. Whereas, when used as a time other than evening and morning, it is not NC-SA. As an example…
View attachment 18516 View attachment 18517
4) Notice the Morphology changes from noun, common, singular, absolute to noun, common, masculine, plural, construct. Are the Hebraist contending there is not a difference in meaning?
5) In addition, I find the following chart interesting.
View attachment 18518
“Yom NC-SA - day (sunset) n. — a unit of time from sunset until the next sunset; including evening and morning.”
6) When taken in like context with other scriptures, “yom” NC-SA is used 1292 times, whereas, when used as meaning something other than evening and morning, a different morphology is used, at least from what I have been able to find.
7) Graphs and quotes are from…
Faithlife Corporation. (2017). day (sunset) (Version 6.14 SR-5) [Computer software]. Logos Bible Software Bible Sense Lexicon. Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation. Retrieved from https://ref.ly/logos4/Senses;KeyId=ws.day.n.01
For the sake of devil's advocate:2) The issue of a normal 24 hour day as opposed to a period of time.
“God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” (Genesis 1:5, NASB95)
3) Every place in Genesis with the subject of creation uses the noun, common, singular, absolute of “yom”. Whereas, when used as a time other than evening and morning, it is not NC-SA. As an example…
View attachment 18516 View attachment 18517
4) Notice the Morphology changes from noun, common, singular, absolute to noun, common, masculine, plural, construct. Are the Hebraist contending there is not a difference in meaning?
Genesis 1 refers to 24 hour days. There is really no getting around it. There are no billions of years and I tire of seeing Christians try to justify billions of years in Genesis 1.
I can self identify as such, yes.Are you a Christian?
Many millions of Christians do not believe the Bible to contain "God's words". In fact, most, I would imagine. Inerrant literalists are a minority among Christians. Most Christians believe the Bible is exactly what it claims to be: a divinely inspired and useful theological and spiritual guide, written by men.
Also, I am not a religious Christian.
God has offered mankind no 'words' that I am aware of. And pretending that man's words carry God's authority is idolatry.
Why is it so hard to accept the fact that ancient savages might've been wrong about a few things, and that even though they may have *thought* that they spoke for god, they may not have actually done so.What facts? Abiogenesis, macroevolution, old Earth theories are not facts.
You don't think Exodus contains God's words?
Such facts as the age of the earth, the fact that evolution is what is responsible for all the forms of animal life as we have it on the planet, the fact the sun is the center of the solar systems, and so on and so forth. There are many Christians who deny these things against all evidences. I consider that weak, or frankly non-existent faith. So why do you deny these are facts? Do you claim to have evidence to the contrary which is accepted by specialists in those given fields of science, or is it a matter of 'faith' for you, "faith" that science is nuts and doesn't know what the hell it's talking about?What facts? Abiogenesis, macroevolution, old Earth theories are not facts.
You're a legend in your own mind.
1) This is intended for those who say they are Christians but try to explain away the creation version in Genesis using “interpretation” and/or “translation” issues in order to reconcile with non-believers.
2) The issue of a normal 24 hour day as opposed to a period of time.
“God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” (Genesis 1:5, NASB95)
3) Every place in Genesis with the subject of creation uses the noun, common, singular, absolute of “yom”. Whereas, when used as a time other than evening and morning, it is not NC-SA. As an example…
View attachment 18516 View attachment 18517
4) Notice the Morphology changes from noun, common, singular, absolute to noun, common, masculine, plural, construct. Are the Hebraist contending there is not a difference in meaning?
5) In addition, I find the following chart interesting.
View attachment 18518
“Yom NC-SA - day (sunset) n. — a unit of time from sunset until the next sunset; including evening and morning.”
6) When taken in like context with other scriptures, “yom” NC-SA is used 1292 times, whereas, when used as meaning something other than evening and morning, a different morphology is used, at least from what I have been able to find.
7) Graphs and quotes are from…
Faithlife Corporation. (2017). day (sunset) (Version 6.14 SR-5) [Computer software]. Logos Bible Software Bible Sense Lexicon. Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation. Retrieved from https://ref.ly/logos4/Senses;KeyId=ws.day.n.01