• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The scriptures are hard to understand

Segev Moran

Well-Known Member
The 7 days are not solar days.
It doesn't speak of the actual time each period is.
It only symbolizes a beginning and end of a period.
So first day is not a day in the sense we use it today.
It might be a much shorter or a much longer or an actual day :)
They are lighted by the light of Genesis 1:3 before there was a sun.
Maybe :)
Therefore there is no solid reason to believe they are 24 hour periods of time as we know them. On the contrary they are days to God.
Not quite, as God has no Time meaning based on the Jewish belief.
It represents a "task" more than a time.
Look at it as a chronicle of creation other than time frame.
The Jewish only starts counting from the creation of man. since then they have a very detailed time line (in years and at time actual dates)
I'm not certain God even counts time the same way we do. It says God rested from all His work on the 7th day. I suspect in a certain way; the 7th day is yet to come when God is truly finished working. This is when the new heavens and earth are finished. (Isaiah 65:17)
It is believed that the periods of creation also represent the periods of human existence divided to thousands of years.
So on year 6001 we actually enter the "Sabbath" of
Well no, not for me. But I understand some people believe the scriptures that way.
Yep. it is a debate amongst many
Are you Jewish?
Yep, not religious (never was).
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
It doesn't speak of the actual time each period is.
It only symbolizes a beginning and end of a period.
So first day is not a day in the sense we use it today.
It might be a much shorter or a much longer or an actual day :)
It's true. I also believe each day could be different amounts of time; at least as we perceive time.
I'll take a maybe.
Not quite, as God has no Time meaning based on the Jewish belief.
It represents a "task" more than a time.
Look at it as a chronicle of creation other than time frame.
The Jewish only starts counting from the creation of man. since then they have a very detailed time line (in years and at time actual dates)
I mostly agree. The 7 days actually represent the ages of the world in foreshadowing.
It is believed that the periods of creation also represent the periods of human existence divided to thousands of years.
So on year 6001 we actually enter the "Sabbath" of
Interesting. So it's year 5778. If you're right then we have a ways to go before the Sabbath of God. I actually don't know myself if they are literally 1000 year days or not. But it's an interesting idea.
Yep, not religious (never was).
I recently learned I'm part Jewish. I now want free land in Israel. (Just kidding)
 

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
OT
  • Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His Son's name? Surely you know! (Proverbs 30:4)
  • Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, And a branch from his roots will bear fruit. And the Spirit of the LORD will rest on Him, The spirit of wisdom and understanding, The spirit of counsel and strength, The spirit of knowledge and the fear of the LORD. (Isaiah 11:1-2)
  • "Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen one in whom My soul delights. I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the nations. (Isaiah 42:1)
  • "Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord GOD has sent Me, and His Spirit." (Isaiah 48:16)
  • The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me, Because the LORD has anointed Me To bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent Me to bind up the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to captives, And freedom to prisoners; (Isaiah 61:1)
  • In all their affliction He was afflicted, And the angel of His presence saved them; In His love and in His mercy He redeemed them; And He lifted them and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled And grieved His Holy Spirit; Therefore, He turned Himself to become their enemy, He fought against them. (Isaiah 63:9-10)
NT

  • John 20:28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” (speaking of Jesus by the Apostle Thomas)
  • 1 Cor 3:16 Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? (If it is God's Spirit, it is God)
  • John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, the word was with God, the word was Godl (Speaking of Jesus)
  • john 14:16 Helper, to be with you forever, the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you. (all three)
  • 2 Cor 13:14 iThe grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and kthe fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.

Ok - First of all I don't see the word Trinity mentioned anywhere in what you gave. Nor do I see an apostle teaching there are 3 persons in the Godhead.

Surely you will agree that there is only 1 God - Right?
Do you agree that the 1 God is a Spirit ? John 4:24 ( Notice it doesn't say 3 persons it says a Spirit)
Do you agree that there is only 1 Spirit ? Ephesians 4:4
Do you agree that God is Holy? Ephesians 4:30
God said in the last days I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh. Joel 2:28 So the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God. Would you agree?
Paul said that to us there is but one God - the Father
You say that the Father and the Holy Spirit are 2 separate persons. Which of those 2 persons is the Father according to Matthew 1:18-20 ?
( the Father and the Holy Spirit are one and the same Spirit, not 2 separate persons)
The scriptures say that God was in the Messiah reconciling the world to himself. God was manifest/made known in the flesh. In other words he appeared in a body.
The Messiah said I and my Father are One. John 10:30 If you have seen me you have seen the Father. The Father that dwells in me, he does the works. John 14:7-10
So the question is who was dwelling in that body? Colossians 2:9 For in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.
 

Segev Moran

Well-Known Member
It's true. I also believe each day could be different amounts of time; at least as we perceive time.

I'll take a maybe.

I mostly agree. The 7 days actually represent the ages of the world in foreshadowing.

Interesting. So it's year 5778. If you're right then we have a ways to go before the Sabbath of God. I actually don't know myself if they are literally 1000 year days or not. But it's an interesting idea.

I recently learned I'm part Jewish. I now want free land in Israel. (Just kidding)
What do you mean Part?
 

tayla

My dog's name is Tayla
The scriptures are hard to understand. If God doesn't reveal the truth; then you won't understand.
I assume you refer to the Bible. Yes, Jesus mentions that the parables are for the purpose of not being understood. But why would there need to be an additional revelation from God to explain and elucidate the first revelation from God, the Bible? This is what Gnosticism taught and they were condemned as heretics.
 

Hawkins

Well-Known Member
The scriptures are hard to understand. If God doesn't reveal the truth; then you won't understand.

The message of salvation itself is simple and obvious. It says that we can choose to be under the New Covenant (gospel or good news) and thus to be saved by believing Jesus Christ. Period.

However humans are curious before they decide to believe. They believe human history not because human history can be evidenced. They believe so because they have no choice, as if one insists on evidence he has to reject history. They believe because history is the recording to human behaviors which are understandable by humans. They don't believe the Bible because it is a recording of God's deeds which may not always fall into man's understanding.
 

Hawkins

Well-Known Member
I don't see faith as a reliable path to knowledge. Name something you cannot believe solely on faith.......
I rather think empirical knowledge is thus-far the most reliable means to that end.

If it's god that does the "drawing", then I will wait for that day. But he must do it by providing credible evidence of his existence. Apparently, those who believe in him are also waiting for credible evidence as well, because when I press them for it, they continuously provide logical fallacies, poor arguments, or fall back on faith again.

Evidence itself is a logical fallacy, poor argument. You don't need evidence to believe that earth is revolving around the sun, or do you? 99.99% don't need evidence to believe that earth being revolving around the sun, they don't need evidence to believe that black holes, or atoms or electrons exists. All they need is the faith that our scientists have the proof. Faith is the most fundamental way for humans to approach a truth efficiently. It is the only way to reach a truth otherwise unreachable to us.

Hey, what you just did today but a year ago? We have 7 billion humans on earth and I bet that virtually none of us can tell what we did exactly today but a year ago. Science or empirical evidence can hardly bring us there. We all have no yesterday if evidence is the only way to trust.

On the other hand, we can get to know what you did that day if an eyewitness wrote (or better tape) down what you did and for us to believe with faith! Evidence or science or anything empirical is provided we can physically go there to gather evidence. We as humans however are limited and incapable creatures that we can't go back to the past (such as a day in your life years ago), we can't peek on the future. We can't go out of our space to confirm the gods. It's not a matter of lack of evidence. It's matter of human incapability to gather the evidence.

The one way which always works is faith. We can reach the unreachable (such as what you did years ago) by putting faith in what has been written down by the eyewitnesses. We don't need to examine the black holes to tell that they exist. Our scientists will do the job for us. We need faith in them, that's what we need. Similarly, we don't need to dig evidence to know what are happening around the world. Our reporters and journalists will act as eyewitnesses to write down the news and for us to believe with faith. This is how this reality operates.

You can't live this reality simply because you are brainwashed to think that we believe a fact by acquiring evidence, while we don't. Instead we sit in front of our TVs to choose what to believe with faith but without evidence. That's what we are doing on a daily basis.

That said. It is said that we are all bound to a covenant which says that humans need to be saved by faith. If empirical evidence is available, it simultaneously means all mankind shall go to hell. Empirical evidence will finally come but at the moment that you no longer have the option to switch camps.
 
Last edited:

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Evidence itself is a logical fallacy, poor argument. You don't need evidence to believe that earth is revolving around the sun, or do you? 99.99% don't need evidence to believe that earth being revolving around the sun, they don't need evidence to believe that black holes, or atoms or electrons exists. All they need is the faith that our scientists have the proof. Faith is the most fundamental way for humans to approach a truth efficiently. It is the only way to reach a truth otherwise unreachable to us.

Hey, what you just did today but a year ago? We have 7 billion humans on earth and I bet that virtually none of us can tell what we did exactly today but a year ago. Science or empirical evidence can hardly bring us there. We all have no yesterday if evidence is the only way to trust.

On the other hand, we can get to know what you did that day if an eyewitness wrote (or better tape) down what you did and for us to believe with faith! Evidence or science or anything empirical is provided we can physically go there to gather evidence. We as humans however are limited and incapable creatures that we can't go back to the past (such as a day in your life years ago), we can't peek on the future. We can't go out of our space to confirm the gods. It's not a matter of lack of evidence. It's matter of human incapability to gather the evidence.

The one way which always works is faith. We can reach the unreachable (such as what you did years ago) by putting faith in what has been written down by the eyewitnesses. We don't need to examine the black holes to tell that they exist. Our scientists will do the job for us. We need faith in them, that's what we need. Similarly, we don't need to dig evidence to know what are happening around the world. Our reporters and journalists will act as eyewitnesses to write down the news and for us to believe with faith. This is how this reality operates.

You can't live this reality simply because you are brainwashed to think that we believe a fact by acquiring evidence, while we don't. Instead we sit in front of our TVs to choose what to believe with faith but without evidence. That's what we are doing on a daily basis.

That said. It is said that we are all bound to a covenant which says that humans need to be saved by faith. If empirical evidence is available, it simultaneously means all mankind shall go to hell. Empirical evidence will finally come but at the moment that you no longer have the option to switch camps.

1. No, you don't need evidence to believe something. You need evidence to know that the belief is true.
2. Faith utterly fails as a way to truth. There is pretty much nothing you cannot believe solely on faith.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
I assume you refer to the Bible. Yes, Jesus mentions that the parables are for the purpose of not being understood. But why would there need to be an additional revelation from God to explain and elucidate the first revelation from God, the Bible? This is what Gnosticism taught and they were condemned as heretics.
Gnostics taught many other things besides so that alone doesn't make them heretics. The fact is that the Bible is meant to make us know and understand God more. How would it help us understand and know God more if we could understand it by ourselves? So you understand it through the holy Spirit then it is teaching you in both Word and in reality to rely on the holy Spirit.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Every scripture is given by God. God also gives dreams, visions parables etc. We must seek by faith for the understanding just as Daniel or Joseph could not interpret a dream by themselves but must be shown by the holy Spirit.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Gnostics taught many other things besides so that alone doesn't make them heretics. The fact is that the Bible is meant to make us know and understand God more. How would it help us understand and know God more if we could understand it by ourselves? So you understand it through the holy Spirit then it is teaching you in both Word and in reality to rely on the holy Spirit.

So what non-subjective testing can one do to detect this spirit? How does one know one is not simply listening to one’s on thoughts?
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
So what non-subjective testing can one do to detect this spirit? How does one know one is not simply listening to one’s on thoughts?
In a single instant God is able to provide everything required. Then one would know the truth for sure without any doubt.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
In a single instant God is able to provide everything required. Then one would know the truth for sure without any doubt.

God is able to provide everything in an instant......
So then the Bible is superfluous? Interesting.
You have not actually answered the question. How can one objectively know one is hearing this spirit? Perhaps you might want to look up the word objective? How does one objectively verify it’s existence? For instance, if you are “hearing” it, that means it is audible (producing sound waves). Those can be recorded. But if you are just “hearing” it in your head, how do you objectively distinguish that from your own thoughts?
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
God is able to provide everything in an instant......
So then the Bible is superfluous? Interesting.
You have not actually answered the question. How can one objectively know one is hearing this spirit? Perhaps you might want to look up the word objective? How does one objectively verify it’s existence? For instance, if you are “hearing” it, that means it is audible (producing sound waves). Those can be recorded. But if you are just “hearing” it in your head, how do you objectively distinguish that from your own thoughts?
The point is that you wouldn't need a test.

The Bible is not superfluous, but it's not absolutely essential for salvation. Take someone who doesn't know how to read for example. They can be saved without the Bible.

But, the thing about the Bible is we wouldn't know about God without it. And everyone is different, many people have come to know God by just reading a Bible with an open mind. And it teaches someone who is already saved a lot they need to know to continue growing.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
The point is that you wouldn't need a test.

The Bible is not superfluous, but it's not absolutely essential for salvation. Take someone who doesn't know how to read for example. They can be saved without the Bible.

But, the thing about the Bible is we wouldn't know about God without it. And everyone is different, many people have come to know God by just reading a Bible with an open mind. And it teaches someone who is already saved a lot they need to know to continue growing.

So you can be saved without knowing anything in the Bible? Then it is superfluous..........can’t have it both ways
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
So you can be saved without knowing anything in the Bible? Then it is superfluous..........can’t have it both ways
I just don't see it that way ...
1. How is it superfluous if it helps you grow spiritually?
2. And how is it superfluous if even though (hypothetically) you don't know how to read; yet the person who actually told you about the gospel learned the gospel from the Bible?
 
Top