Reconciling Paul

[Ken Brown]

Usually when someone points a finger at everyone else, its in a mirror where the problem is identified.

Hi outhouse, I'm not pointing a finger, I have let posts lay dormant before thinking I would get back to trying to answer the question presented to me. I usually try to get back and answer questions, but when Sandy asked where his thread had gone, I was letting him, you, and Shermana know that questions needed to be answered. That's not pointing a finger, but it sure seems like someone might be trying to make it look like I have a problem, instead of owning up for a lack of responding. KB

 

[outhouse]

Hi outhouse, I'm not pointing a finger, I have let posts lay dormant before thinking I would get back to trying to answer the question presented to me. I usually try to get back and answer questions, but when Sandy asked where his thread had gone, I was letting him, you, and Shermana know that questions needed to be answered. That's not pointing a finger, but it sure seems like someone might be trying to make it look like I have a problem, instead of owning up for a lack of responding. KB

You have already denied all of our explanations in favor of your own.

You have denied professors of theology for your own interpretation of scripture.


Love ya brother, im glad you take things better then most, and you are very civil. Don't take my theological differences for dislike. I do respect your opinion and I do like how you hold faith tight while holding a great attitude towards others, for the most part.

 

[Ken Brown]

You have already denied all of our explanations in favor of your own.

You have denied professors of theology for your own interpretation of scripture.

Love ya brother, im glad you take things better then most, and you are very civil. Don't take my theological differences for dislike. I do respect your opinion and I do like how you hold faith tight while holding a great attitude towards others, for the most part.

Hi outhouse, I'm glad you have a good attitude also. With that attitude, you should consider that Yeshua was accused of not being part of the scholars of His day (John 7:15), and it appears that He did quite well in demolishing His opponents to where they would flee and not ask Him any more questions:

(Mt 22:46) And no man was able to answer Him a word, neither durst any [man] from that day forth ask Him any more [questions.]

Now outhouse, maybe I should refresh your memory of what we were discussing. I stated the Yeshua predicted that He would be crucified, and on many occasions that He would suffer, die, and be raised on the third day. You come back by saying that someone that never even knew Yeshua wrote about these things centuries after He lived. Which brings us to the SIGN of Jonah. Why would someone centuries after Yeshua lived conjure up this OT story about Jonah being in a huge fish for three days and three nights, as proof that Yeshua was who He said He was? It seems rather far fetched that someone would have that kind of reasoning capability, centuries after Yeshua was resurrected in three days and three nights.

Here is the kicker outhouse. Moses wrote of Yeshua's resurrection on the third day, and he was almost fourteen centuries BEFORE Yeshua. How do you explain that? You are getting yourself into a pickle by listening to "scholars" who don't know a hill of beans. KB

 

[outhouse]

Hi outhouse, I'm glad you have a good attitude also. With that attitude, you should consider that Yeshua was accused of not being part of the scholars of His day (John 7:15), and it appears that He did quite well in demolishing His opponents to where they would flee and not ask Him any more questions:

(Mt 22:46) And no man was able to answer Him a word, neither durst any [man] from that day forth ask Him any more [questions.]

Now outhouse, maybe I should refresh your memory of what we were discussing. I stated the Yeshua predicted that He would be crucified, and on many occasions that He would suffer, die, and be raised on the third day. You come back by saying that someone that never even knew Yeshua wrote about these things centuries after He lived. Which brings us to the SIGN of Jonah. Why would someone centuries after Yeshua lived conjure up this OT story about Jonah being in a huge fish for three days and three nights, as proof that Yeshua was who He said He was? It seems rather far fetched that someone would have that kind of reasoning capability, centuries after Yeshua was resurrected in three days and three nights.

Here is the kicker outhouse. Moses wrote of Yeshua's resurrection on the third day, and he was almost fourteen centuries BEFORE Yeshua. How do you explain that? You are getting yourself into a pickle by listening to "scholars" who don't know a hill of beans. KB

You seem to confuse Historians for apologetics.

I am seeking the real history here. The bible has never been a history book, or supposed to be literally read.

In my opinion Moses never existed in any shape or form other then literary.

Israelites factually evolved from displaced Canaanites. Factually is the key word here, and its not up for debate.

 

[Ken Brown]

You seem to confuse Historians for apologetics.

I am seeking the real history here. The bible has never been a history book, or supposed to be literally read.

In my opinion Moses never existed in any shape or form other then literary.

Israelites factually evolved from displaced Canaanites. Factually is the key word here, and its not up for debate.

Hi outhouse, well aren't you going to be surprised one day. Anyway, I guess I just got confused when you were speaking about "professors of theology," and my own interpretation of Scripture. Scripture shouldn't really be interpreted if it is nothing but fairy tales, and you are wasting a lot of your time trying to convince people about these stories and people that never existed, and that's not up for debate. KB

 

[outhouse]

Hi outhouse, well aren't you going to be surprised one day. Anyway, I guess I just got confused when you were speaking about "professors of theology," and my own interpretation of Scripture. Scripture shouldn't really be interpreted if it is nothing but fairy tales, and you are wasting a lot of your time trying to convince people about these stories and people that never existed, and that's not up for debate. KB

Your missing the point.

It was never written as fairy tales.

The multiple unknown authors in places often believed what they were writing.

But that doesn't change historical facts like the ones that state Israelites evolved from displaced Canaanites.


Do you believe a flood covered the earth? and the world is only 6000 years old?

 

[sincerly]

Your missing the point.

It was never written as fairy tales.

The multiple unknown authors in places often believed what they were writing.

But that doesn't change historical facts like the ones that state Israelites evolved from displaced Canaanites.


Do you believe a flood covered the earth? and the world is only 6000 years old?

Hi outhouse, Correct, the prophets who wrote the Scriptures knew who they believed and wrote their accounts concerning the events which were evolving during their lives---therefore, facts.

The facts were the Israelites did displace some of the Canaanites---some of the peoples of that area were not driven out and the Israelites assembled the forbidden activities into the Truths of GOD.

I believe the Creator GOD can and did do the things HE specified.
Wikipedia and "scholars" are still "evolving" their claimed "truths".

 

[outhouse]

Hi outhouse, Correct, the prophets who wrote the Scriptures knew who they believed and wrote their accounts concerning the events which were evolving during their lives---therefore, facts.

The facts were the Israelites did displace some of the Canaanites---some of the peoples of that area were not driven out and the Israelites assembled the forbidden activities into the Truths of GOD.

I believe the Creator GOD can and did do the things HE specified.
Wikipedia and "scholars" are still "evolving" their claimed "truths".

Do you believe a flood covered the earth? and the world is only 6000 years old?

 

[Ken Brown]

Your missing the point.

It was never written as fairy tales.

The multiple unknown authors in places often believed what they were writing.

But that doesn't change historical facts like the ones that state Israelites evolved from displaced Canaanites.

Do you believe a flood covered the earth? and the world is only 6000 years old?

Hi outhouse, I'm sure you have heard of William Dever, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, and he states the following to the question he received in bold:

Why is it difficult for archeologists to find support for the accounts of the patriarchs?

It disturbs some people that, for the very early periods such as the so-called patriarchal period, we archeologists haven't much to say. The later we come in time, the firmer the ground we stand on—we have better sources. We have more written sources. We have more contemporary eyewitness sources.
For the earlier periods, we don't have any texts. Abraham might have lived around 1800 B.C.E. This is the dawn of written history or prehistory, when the archeological evidence can't easily be correlated with any external evidence, textual evidence—even if we did have it.

And concerning the stories of King David and King Solomon he writes:

Now, archeology can't either prove or disprove the stories. But I think most archeologists today would argue that the United Monarchy was not much more than a kind of hill-country chiefdom. It was very small-scale.

You know outhouse, how can archeologists say that Israelites did not flee or escape from Egypt and settle in the Land of Canaan, and centuries after this happened, they cannot prove or disprove the stories about King David or King Solomon? Me thinks archeologists are flying by the seats of their pants.

Concerning the flood, I have no reason to doubt it happened. Concerning the age of this earth, it is very old, at least that is what the Scriptures indicate. KB

 

[outhouse]

Concerning the flood, I have no reason to doubt it happened.

Was the earth created in a week? a long time ago?

 

[outhouse]

Concerning the flood, I have no reason to doubt it happened.

If a global flood happened, you should be able to pick a date when it happened.

So, what date did a global flood cover the earth?

 

[Ken Brown]

If a global flood happened, you should be able to pick a date when it happened.

So, what date did a global flood cover the earth?

Hi outhouse, the world renown underwater archaeologist/Oceanographer Robert Ballard (whose team found the remains of the Titanic), says it was around the time that the Scriptures said it happened. He also said what may have helped to have a massive flood was the melting of glaciers.

Noah's Ark Evidence May Have Finally Been Found According To Oceanographer Robert Ballard

KB

 

[outhouse]

Hi outhouse, the world renown underwater archaeologist/Oceanographer Robert Ballard (whose team found the remains of the Titanic), says it was around the time that the Scriptures said it happened. He also said what may have helped to have a massive flood was the melting of glaciers.

Noah's Ark Evidence May Have Finally Been Found According To Oceanographer Robert Ballard

KB

So what your saying is the bible is completely wrong, that a regional flood thousands of years before Israelites existed formed the mythology we see in Noahs legend?

Your flip flopping, first you stated global flood , not its a regional flood in the Black sea from the ice age, and thousands of years before writing existed.

 

[Ken Brown]

So what your saying is the bible is completely wrong, that a regional flood thousands of years before Israelites existed formed the mythology we see in Noahs legend?

Your flip flopping, first you stated global flood , not its a regional flood in the Black sea from the ice age, and thousands of years before writing existed.

Hi outhouse, I did not say I agreed with Robert Ballard, I was just giving you one of your esteemed scientists who is flying by the seat of his pants. The only thing I stated about a "global flood" is that I have no reason to doubt that it happened. Can you prove to me that it didn't?

Concerning your other question, "Was the earth created in a week? a long time ago?" I am not certain how long it took to create this earth, but it was created "in the beginning," and then something very devastating happened to cause the earth to become "void and without form." The earth BECAME void and without form, Elohim did not create it that way in the beginning. Now, darkness covered the "face of the deep," and the Spirit of Elohim was sent to RENEW the face of the Earth:

(Pss 104:30) Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

The face of the earth was RENEWED in six days, and Elohim rested on the Seventh day. This truthful understanding allows for a very old earth, and prior "ages." Yeshua, in speaking about "ages" made this statement about sinning against the Spirit:

(Mt 12:32) Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither in this age, nor in that which is to come.

This world has had PRIOR ages (which science validates), and will have FUTURE ages as the Messiah validates. Hope this helps. KB

 

[outhouse]

Hi outhouse, I did not say I agreed with Robert Ballard, I was just giving you one of your esteemed scientists who is flying by the seat of his pants. The only thing I stated about a "global flood" is that I have no reason to doubt that it happened. Can you prove to me that it didn't?

Concerning your other question, "Was the earth created in a week? a long time ago?" I am not certain how long it took to create this earth, but it was created "in the beginning," and then something very devastating happened to cause the earth to become "void and without form." The earth BECAME void and without form, Elohim did not create it that way in the beginning. Now, darkness covered the "face of the deep," and the Spirit of Elohim was sent to RENEW the face of the Earth:

(Pss 104:30) Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

The face of the earth was RENEWED in six days, and Elohim rested on the Seventh day. This truthful understanding allows for a very old earth, and prior "ages." Yeshua, in speaking about "ages" made this statement about sinning against the Spirit:

(Mt 12:32) Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither in this age, nor in that which is to come.

This world has had PRIOR ages (which science validates), and will have FUTURE ages as the Messiah validates. Hope this helps. KB

Quit dodging the question

When did a global flood ever happen?

What is the exact date?



BTW there is no date at all for when the Black Sea became full into its present state. 9400 years ago is a guess, but they state it was a gradual filling, not a flood.

 

[Ken Brown]

Quit dodging the question

When did a global flood ever happen?

What is the exact date?

BTW there is no date at all for when the Black Sea became full into its present state. 9400 years ago is a guess, but they state it was a gradual filling, not a flood.

Hi outhouse, I just gave you an explanation that allows for the earth to be millions of years old and you have nothing to say about that?

Most feel the flood occurred between 2500 b.c. and 2300 b.c. That's the best date I can give you and I would want to research it better to be exact. So it looks like about 4400 years ago. KB

 

[outhouse]

Hi outhouse, I just gave you an explanation that allows for the earth to be millions of years old and you have nothing to say about that?

Most feel the flood occurred between 2500 b.c. and 2300 b.c. That's the best date I can give you and I would want to research it better to be exact. So it looks like about 4400 years ago. KB

Ken I'm glad you don't follow the scripture so close as ditch realty over perceived dogma like YEC.

4400 years ago, there was no break in writing in Egypt, China, or Mesopotamia. A flood factually did not cover the globe at that time.


Now the legend of Noah is said to originate from Mesopotamia. Flood mythology existed there for thousands of years prior to Noah's story and prior to Israelites even existing. The mythology matches word for word in many places in Noah and these earlier legends. The mythology evolves from a river flood to a sea flood.


The oldest legend was a river flood. The flood is attested to 2900 BC when the Euphrates overflowed its banks and wiped out many cities who built along side the banks of this river. A man is said to have went down the river on a barge which came to rest next to a hill and a animal sacrifice was made. Ziusudra is on the known kings list and has a possibility of actually existing, and the legends begin after this real flood and are the original flood legends in the Levant.




The reason for this off topic exercise is one of a example that the bible is not all literal, nor inerrant.

If you view the bible as inerrant and literal, please let me know so I can provide more examples so we can place this text in the proper light and debate it following actual historical guidelines.

 

[Ken Brown]

Ken I'm glad you don't follow the scripture so close as ditch realty over perceived dogma like YEC.

4400 years ago, there was no break in writing in Egypt, China, or Mesopotamia. A flood factually did not cover the globe at that time.

Now the legend of Noah is said to originate from Mesopotamia. Flood mythology existed there for thousands of years prior to Noah's story and prior to Israelites even existing. The mythology matches word for word in many places in Noah and these earlier legends. The mythology evolves from a river flood to a sea flood.

The oldest legend was a river flood. The flood is attested to 2900 BC when the Euphrates overflowed its banks and wiped out many cities who built along side the banks of this river. A man is said to have went down the river on a barge which came to rest next to a hill and a animal sacrifice was made. Ziusudra is on the known kings list and has a possibility of actually existing, and the legends begin after this real flood and are the original flood legends in the Levant.

The reason for this off topic exercise is one of a example that the bible is not all literal, nor inerrant.

If you view the bible as inerrant and literal, please let me know so I can provide more examples so we can place this text in the proper light and debate it following actual historical guidelines.

Hi outhouse, a "man is said" to go down a river and an animal sacrifice is made? Was this a literal, historical event or just a fairy tale as you view most of Scriptures? Let me ask you something. Are you aware of the sites around the world that have mass deposits of various kinds of animal remains all in one place. How is that explained other than rising waters forcing these animals together to higher ground by a vast massive flood? Also, how well do we have information about a continuation of writing 4400 years ago? Just in 1970 our knowledgable scientists claimed we were entering into another "ice age," and now we receive from the same field of knowledgeable scientists that we have "global warming." I don't trust those who have an agenda in dictating their opinionated theories. So I guess, you and I will have to agree to disagree. KB

 

[outhouse]

Ken, you missed the part where I said "Factually" there was no flood 4400 years ago.

Its fact Ken.


Its not up for debate, its not a guess.


I dont know why you try to debate, because your mind is made up and not open to learn. If your here only to preach you may try the same faith section.

Look at what your doing here, your denouncing scientist much more educated then yourself, and you also denounce Professors of NT studies.

 

[Pappillion001]

Hi Pappi, Disobedience! by way of "Lust of the eyes, Lust of the flesh and the pride of life".
No, They only experienced the "Evil" with the disobedience,----Pain, thorns/thistles, tilling of the ground, death, separation from GOD, etc.

Did they only experience good that way as well?

Pappi, Your "point" is exactly the principle and role of the Decalogue it does measure one's conduct as being in harmony with GOD'S WILL or in disobedience to HIS Will.

If that is true then they serve no moral purpose or such moral purpose is secondary to the primary purpose of controlling behavior.

That idea is not Biblical. GOD made mankind in HIS Image

Except that he made man out of the dust of the Earth. A creature of flesh bound to this world for some unknown purpose. The only explanation I know of that is clearly stated is to tend the Garden.

Be ye holy, perfect, righteous, as HE IS. Therefore, GOD made Mankind to live forever. The Tree of Life was in the Garden. (And the Creator communicated with mankind face to face.)

If God wanted man to live forever he would have made him that way. He did not. At best he provided the means for which man could the tree of life, but would not permit man to eat from it once his knowledge became like Gods

Answered at the top of page.
What is it about the "Freedom of choice" that says one doesn't have to obey the declared forbidden acts??
Yes, those you shall notwere for the benefit of the Human beings who were given Dominion over HIS Creation and were to be good stewards in obedience to the Creator's wishes.

Well there you go. It was not God's intention that man have free will, but that he he in obedience to the will of God.

However, Rev.4:11, states, "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. "

What is the point of praising God to the detriment of man? Is God really needing the praise? Would an acknowledgement of man's accomplishments not serve him?

Then we are nothing but stuffed animals or pets?

Human wisdom and opinions say "erase it all", but HE saw worth and Loved that which HE made to the point of dying to "Redeem the rebellious".

He regretted making man and so drowned the world. Would that have not been the time to fix that which had been broken?

So what would have happened if Jesus had not died on the cross? This physical life would have experienced nothing different and our after life would have been spent in Hell? At what point was hell established for man?