oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
It's clearly a parable.
Like the prodigal son story, just a parable.
Doesn't make it any less important though.
Why is it important?
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!
It's clearly a parable.
Like the prodigal son story, just a parable.
Doesn't make it any less important though.
Yes, the "days" are symbolic, theological language, for events. Seven being
the symbol of completeness.
Likewise Jesus is often called the "lamb of God", but that's just similar language.
Genesis doesn't mention the Decan Traps or the Mexican meteorite either - nor
the Neanderthals, the Ming Dynasty, the Aztecs, DNA, viruses, quasars, how
the heart works, Egyptian hieroglyphics of the mystery of the crystal skulls.
That's not the purpose of Genesis. Bringing any of these up serves the sole
purpose of muddying the waters.
Your muddying the waters to justify a religious agena. A few severely stretched interpretive similarities from ancient texts, which is true for ALL ancient texts does not give Genesis any scientific credibility.
Why is it important?
Absolutely no as previously documented with references.
Bogus unethical dishonest science without references. Mid ocean ridges and coastal regions with volcanics have been always been highly concentrated chemical environments today as billions of years ago.
There has been tidal zones since the time life is known to have formed and mid ocean ridges .existed. The evidence is clear as long as the moon existed and oceans existed there has been tidal zones. There is factual objective verifiable evidence of tidal zones and mid ocean rides at the time life has been found in the geologic strat billions of years ago.
What you lack entirely is scientific references to support your assertions based on a religious agenda. Nthing cited so far.
Yes there is no evidence of global Tsunamis, an no evidence of "strange matter" punching through the earth and orbiting the earth's core, and no scientific references cited documented your ridiculous claims.
No scientific references to support these assertions. There is objective verifiable evidence that ice ages have existed through out the history of the earth, and huge impacts of many meteorites all over the globe at different ages over the past billions of years. The huge deposits of Basalt are evidence of the volcanism of the Decan trapes
Then you continue to live the life of ancient monasteries rejecting science for ancient worldview not supported by the evidence.
Need some scientific references, which you have never cited.
Well, you got that wrong.Because it has a message about people who enjoy the good things of this
life and care little about the life to come, or the lives of other people. Jesus
spoke several times about people who have their reward - already, for things
they do or enjoy. And are not entitled to any reward from God.
THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE
This website says the story of lazarus and the rich man is NOT a parable.I lean more to the jehovah witness religion so I believe it IS a parable.What do you think?Do you believe this website backs up the idea of it not being a parable or not?
...and David1967 I find that Scripture agrees with you because of Jesus' words found at Matthew 13:34.
KJV says, ' All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them.'
Mark 4:34 continues with without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they (Jesus and his disciples) were alone he expounded all thing to his disciples - see also Matthew 13:36.
So, what was real, a real happening is what occurred at John 11:11-14.
Whereas, Luke 16 is a parable or illustration story.
Just two points. Tidal zones and organics.
My understanding is that the term "tidal zone" means an area that experiences the tides.
When there was no landfall there were tides, and quite strong ones given the proximity
of the moon to earth, but no "tidal zones."
Tides would just be a bulge in the dark, sterile, global ocean.
Life emerging in mid ocean ridges has gone out of favor, for the reasons I gave above.
A key part of life organics is "concentration" and drying does this quite well. It's the new
theory.
True. What you need to do is ask
1 - how true is this?
2 - what's the chances of getting all this right?
3 - how close do other religious texts come to this?
It's interesting that the Shunyadragon's of past generations openly mocked the bible
for such verses as stating God commanded the waters to bring forth life - so mockery
has been a staple for a long long time.
I myself, going back to the 1980's felt that the first Genesis account wasn't credible
as the early earth was molten, and then bone dry. And (before NASA and the Titan
mission) the earth was never a cloud planet. And life came from the sea first etc..
Well, you got that wrong.
Jesus and the Baptist had one and the same mission, against priesthood and temple corruption. It was all about care and justice on their world, for their folks.
First neither tidal zones with volcanics, nor mid ocean ridges are sterile environments in fact. We still have very fertile volcanics arrising
No it is not, the mid ocean ridges are now on of the dominant possible environments. Concentration of nutrient hydrothermal vents is not problem for the waters arising from mid ocean ridges and volcanics. HydrothermaI vents on land, tidal zones and mid ocean ridges are candidates, and the source is not yet determined. I have provided sources in the past that proved you wrong, and you ignored them.
I believe I have cited this reference before, and I will cite more again, again and again . . .
For beginning: Life's Origins by Land or Sea? Debate Gets Hot
"The question ‘How did life begin?’ is closely linked to the question ‘Where did life begin?’ Most experts agree over ‘when’: 3.8–4 billion years ago. But there is still no consensus as to the environment that could have fostered this event. Since their discovery, deep sea hydrothermal vents have been suggested as the birthplace of life, particularly alkaline vents, like those found at ‘the Lost City’ field in the mid-Atlantic. But not everyone is convinced that life started in the sea – many say the chemistry just won’t work and are looking for a land-based birthplace. With several hypotheses in play, the race is on to replicate the conditions that allowed life to emerge."
The interpretations of all ancient scriptures is not science, and actually none of the ancient scriptures come up with contemporary science.
I have not mocked anything. I just object to the misuse of I believe by the evidence you are mocking science. and misusing scripture to justify your beliefs.
You were more correct in the 1980's and you have been going down hill ever since.
Not agreeing. See below.....Am I wrong? You are agreeing with me, no?
Why do think John and Jesus were 'cleansing and redeeming' folks in the river and then sending them on home with their hard earned money still in their bags?Jesus and John were not focused upon temple corruption -
[/QUOTE]you could clean
up the temple and it still wouldn't change the fact there was to be no further
temple worship - God doesn't dwell in temples, Jesus said.
They weren't "against" the priesthood - the priesthood was from the Old
Testament teachings. They preached the New Covenant where Christ is
our great high priest.
So a perfect temple, perfect priesthood would still not be acceptable.[/QUOTE
The priesthood was a corrupt disloyal bunch of hypocrisy. John made that clear.
That is exactly what Jesus was about.The Gospel isn't about justice per se. Jesus wasn't some Social Justice
Warrior. His kingdom is not of this world.
[/QUOTE]Not agreeing. See below.....
Why do think John and Jesus were 'cleansing and redeeming' folks in the river and then sending them on home with their hard earned money still in their bags?
Why do you think Antipas was ordered to arrest them all?
Yes it does. And the Baptist started it, not Jesus.The theory that Jesus just wanted to clean up a corrupt system makes no sense.
He arrested for the Temple demonstrations and picketing.And that he died trying to do this is without facts.
Look, if that is what you believe, then fine, but I believe that the Baptist and Jesus (and their disciples) were redeeming folks in the river for nothing because redemtion in the Temple was a complete rip off. Hence the word.... redeemer.He was sent as the Redeemer, one who pays the price for our sins - the lamb of
God. His death signified that the way unto God was through Christ - the veil of the
temple was torn to signify this. Jesus is "our great high priest", we are "the temple
of the living God."
A few decent priests could not make the whole lot decent.Cleaning up some corruption (and not all priests were corrupt) would make Jesus
an Old Testament figure, one who failed trying. And we would be left to honor Him
by becoming observant Jews.
Yes it was.This was no Jesus' mission.
Yes it does. And the Baptist started it, not Jesus.
Just read about it and research the background facts.....
He arrested for the Temple demonstrations and picketing.
It's all there to read about.
Look, if that is what you believe, then fine, but I believe that the Baptist and Jesus (and their disciples) were redeeming folks in the river for nothing because redemtion in the Temple was a complete rip off. Hence the word.... redeemer.
A few decent priests could not make the whole lot decent.
It seems that the whole Levite clan has everything tied up from junior positions right up to the top, and everyone else was kept down. There was no middle class.
The Baptist reckoned that the whole bunch were a nest of vipers, and I believe him.
Yes it was.
Yes it does. And the Baptist started it, not Jesus.
Do read G-Mark.Really? So Jesus/John were just observant Jews wanting to restore Judaism?
That's what they were doing....... redeeming and cleansing by immersion in the river....... for free.The baptisms;
We often take food and drink together, before we part. So did they.the bread and wine;
A squall could well have ripped a Temple veil, but who exactly saw that happen? How do you tie in such a coincidence ?the tearing of the veil;
I have known amazing healers in my lifetime. Harry Edwards was one of them. I have no problem with Jesus as a healer.the healings;
Those failed....... that's why they went to Jerusalem to demonstrate in the Temple. Maybe that could work better.the two
by two ministry;
Jesus sais it........ 'I will have mercy and not sacrifice'.the rejection of the idea of God even being in the temple; the
rejection of the role of a priesthood; the rejection of the old Passover rites; the
rejection of a role as a new Jewish king; the rejection of wealth; the rejection of
all Old Testament symbols and so, so forth - was to purify Judaism?
Jesus demonstrated in the Temple on his second visit, hhe picketed the Temple courts during his second and third visits.Wow. Do you thinking this "picketing" and "demonstrations"
That's very muddled and very strange, imo, ....... that is.was to promote
equality, gay rights, transgender operations for 5 year old boys?