Seriously? Just about every one.Amy.G said:Yes I did. But I guess I missed it. Which post did you tell how I can see the gospel in the stars?![]()
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Seriously? Just about every one.Amy.G said:Yes I did. But I guess I missed it. Which post did you tell how I can see the gospel in the stars?![]()
Agreed.Pastor Larry said:I don't think this is correct. Either of these may speak of written words, but they do not necessarily do so. Several places, such as Job 22:22, speak of the "instruction of his mouth." Doing a search on these words in the OT would show that your foundation is faulty.
Abraham obeyed what God had commanded him to do, whether or not it was written down.
webdog said:...so He mentions two constellations by name...just to show Job he's the creator? Kind of odd.
.
The above bolded is what you added to both things in the text, the heavens, and the sky. Which proclaims which?
Why does "via the constellation" have to be in there? As a fellow dispy, these are the same arguments we both refute of our amill friends. Since Scripture doesn't contradict, Psalm 19 points to Romans 10 and vice versa. Paul, in context, was speaking of the Gospel having gone out to all the world...not "general revelation", but that which is preached...the Good News
I gave the proof that God mentioned the constellations. You have not given me an alternative to what I have said. He didn't create the constellations, so your argument is not making sense. Why are they specifically mentioned by names by God?How can you say this? God does this throughout the book of Job, in Psalms, and all over the place (referring to things in creation to show Him as Creator). The burden is on you to show that this references is giving the gospel.
I have. Paul indeed connects the Gospel going out to all the world with the heavens of Ps. 19. Have they not heard? Of course they have...I don't get what you are asking about Ps. 19. Have you read it tonight? I did.
Paul using Ps 19 in Rom. 10 does not mean the constellations give the gospel.
Source:According to this theory, God presented His full plan of salvation to Adam, and either Adam or his early descendents preserved that knowledge by naming the constellations and stars. With the coming of the written Word of God, the gospel message in the stars was no longer needed and faded from use. With the passage of time, ungodly men perverted the original gospel in the stars, mingling it with pagan mythology and ultimately turning it into the religion of astrology.
The English woman Frances Rolleston supposedly rediscovered this long-hidden truth and published her work 140 years ago in Mazzaroth. Many authors since then have uncritically
As an example of Rolleston’s methodology, consider the meaning that she found for the star Deneb, the brightest star in the constellation Cygnus. She reasoned that it was a perversion of the Hebrew dan, which means “judge.” Because Hebrew scribes added marks for vowels much later, one could suppose that this is possible. However, why search for some other meaning when the traditional Arabic meaning works so well? The Arab word deneb means “tail,” and it marks the tail of Cygnus. Incidentally, several other stars contain deneb as a portion of their names, and in each case they mark the tails of their respective constellations. Yet Rolleston persisted with her reinterpretation of words.
The name Orion appears three times in the Bible (Job 9:9, 38:31; Amos 5:8). Rolleston correctly noted that Chesil is the Hebrew word translated as “Orion” in all three instances and that Hebrew tradition generally identified Orion with Nimrod. Orion is a hunter, and Nimrod was a mighty hunter before the Lord (Genesis 10:9), so this connection makes sense.
Rolleston viewed Orion as a type of Christ. On most star charts a hare lies beneath the feet of Orion, but Rolleston noted that in some ancient charts a snake lies below his feet. Presumably, this snake has bitten, or bruised, Orion’s heal, but Orion is crushing the serpent’s head in fulfillment of the first messianic prophecy (Genesis 3:15). She also noted that in some mythologies Orion was stung to death by a scorpion. Some of those stories have Orion stung on the foot, but others do not specify where the scorpion stung Orion.
There are several problems with this interpretation. First, a scorpion is not a snake. To claim that a scorpion illustrates Genesis 3:15 is a tremendous stretch. Second, there are other stories of Orion’s demise, so Rolleston was very selective in which stories she wished to use and which she wished to ignore. Then there is the matter of the identification of Christ with Nimrod, who is hardly a positive character in the Old Testament.
Far more problematic is the Hebrew word used for Orion. Elsewhere in the Old Testament this word is translated “fool.” For instance, chesil is the word translated “fool” eight times in Proverbs 26. Thus, by the Hebrew name for him, we can see that Orion is not an individual worthy of respect and devotion. To equate this fool with a type of Christ borders on blasphemy, and most Christians ought to find this offensive. If Rolleston had been as proficient in Hebrew as required to do word studies, then she ought to have known that the Hebrew word for Orion is the same as a “fool.”
But there is a far more serious objection to the gospel in the stars: it contradicts biblical texts. The New Testament calls the gospel a “mystery” (1 Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 6:19, 3:8–12; Colossians 4:3). In the New Testament, a mystery is something that was previously unknown but now is revealed to us. Romans 16:25–26 states that this mystery was hidden for long ages and was revealed through prophetic writings (that is, in the Old Testament, not in the stars). 1 Corinthians 2:8 further tells us that, if the princes of this world had known of this mystery, “they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” 1 Peter 1:10–12 suggests that, while the prophets “searched diligently,” they failed to grasp fully the gospel before its time.
webdog said:I gave the proof that God mentioned the constellations. You have not given me an alternative to what I have said. He didn't create the constellations, so your argument is not making sense.
Why are they specifically mentioned by names by God?
I have. Paul indeed connects the Gospel going out to all the world with the heavens of Ps. 19. Have they not heard? Of course they have
Possible? I guess, but I doubt it. Some was probably intuitive conscience, and some was probably direct revelation would be my guess.Is it possible these charges, commandments, statutes and laws were codified by Abraham and the other patriarchs? Was is "oral tradition" or "intuitive" or simply God teaching each one of the patriarchs singularly.
If I understand your point, I don't agree. I think there are a number of uses where it is not codified law, such as the one I cited earlier and a number of others. The word simply means instruction or teaching. I don't think it necessarily implies codification.The Hebrew word "torah" (not it's English equivalents and synonyms) is used 223 times in the OT and if your rebutal is true then Genesis 26:5 is the only place where it not used of a codified law.
Yes, too bad about the star stuff. That is way off topic here.I don't know how we got so involved with the star thing but that's not my idea of codifcation, the written word and/or oral tradition seems far more likely to me.
No, you haven't misunderstood me.Pastor Larry said:Possible? I guess, but I doubt it. Some was probably intuitive conscience, and some was probably direct revelation would be my guess.
If I understand your point, I don't agree. I think there are a number of uses where it is not codified law, such as the one I cited earlier and a number of others. The word simply means instruction or teaching. I don't think it necessarily implies codification.
But again, perhaps I misunderstand you.
Why not simply take it as the instructions of God to Abraham about how to live life in faith?
Yes, too bad about the star stuff. That is way off topic here.
Now we know that Moses knew how to write, and we know that he wrote things in books. Look at Exodus 17:14. The only use of the word book in the Bible prior to Exodus 17:14 it is in conjunction with this phrase back in Genesis 5:1. Looking at that word “Book” in Genesis 5:1, it is the Hebrew word cepher. It is the same word used in Exodus 17:14 and it cannot mean anything but a written record. Genesis 5:1 says without any doubt that there was a written record of the generations of Adam. Now I guess you could explain that as just a reference to Genesis itself even if Moses wrote it, but to me the implication is clear that there was a written record before Moses.Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
Genesis 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Genesis 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
Genesis 10:1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.
Genesis 10:32 These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood.
Genesis 11:10 These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood:
Genesis 11:27 Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot.
Genesis 25:12-13 Now these are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham's son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah's handmaid, bare unto Abraham: And these are the names of the sons of Ishmael, by their names, according to their generations: the firstborn of Ishmael, Nebajoth; and Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam,
Genesis 25:19 And these are the generations of Isaac, Abraham's son: Abraham begat Isaac:
Genesis 36:1 Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom.
Genesis 36:9 And these are the generations of Esau the father of the Edomites in mount Seir:
Genesis 37:2 These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph, being seventeen years old, was feeding the flock with his brethren; and the lad was with the sons of Bilhah, and with the sons of Zilpah, his father's wives: and Joseph brought unto his father their evil report.
Thanks Tentmaker. Yes it is evident that records of all kinds were kept in pre-law days.North Carolina Tentmaker said:Wow, Thanks for the thread HankD. I am sorry I let it go 5 pages without jumping in but this thread was seriously derailed. This is something I have thought about and studied quite a bit and I agree with you. Hang on because this is going to get a little long.
I believe Abraham had written tablets that had been passed down to him and that he in turn passed them on. I believe that the Bible itself tells us this. I will be very specific.
There is a phrase repeated several times throughout the book of Genesis. It is “These are the generations.” This phrase is a translation of a single Hebrew word, towleah. It occurs 13 times in the book of Genesis.Now we know that Moses knew how to write, and we know that he wrote things in books. Look at Exodus 17:14. The only use of the word book in the Bible prior to Exodus 17:14 it is in conjunction with this phrase back in Genesis 5:1. Looking at that word “Book” in Genesis 5:1, it is the Hebrew word cepher. It is the same word used in Exodus 17:14 and it cannot mean anything but a written record. Genesis 5:1 says without any doubt that there was a written record of the generations of Adam. Now I guess you could explain that as just a reference to Genesis itself even if Moses wrote it, but to me the implication is clear that there was a written record before Moses.
Something else that makes the hair on my neck stand up is look at Exodus 13:19. When Moses left Egypt he took something with him, the bones of Joseph. Now that Hebrew word translated bones is etsem. It does mean bones, but it can also mean essence or self. Yes I do believe that the children of Israel took the body of Joseph with them out of Egypt, I have no problem with that. But I also believe that with that body Moses also retrieved something more important, the family history that Joseph had received from his father and added to by his own hand.
So here is what I believe, I believe that Genesis was written by as many as 9 people . I believe God himself, walking side by side in the garden with Adam told him what to write in the first section. Then I believe that was added to by Adam, Noah, Shem, Terah, Ishmael, Isaac, Esau, Jacob, and finally by Joseph before being passed on to Moses. I believe that phrase about the generations is a key dividing line between the sections written by different authors.
It is interesting to me that there is not a section attributed to Abraham but there are sections given to his father and to his sons. Another twist, since it has been suggested that Moses’ father in law Jethro was a descendant of Esau Moses may have picked up some of these tablets while living in the desert. No way to know, I just propose the possibility. So I believe that Moses assembled the tablets, translated them if necessary and then combined them into the first book of the Law. At least that is what I believe.
This idea is not new to me. I first read about this in John Phillip’s book “Exploring Genesis.” (which is an awesome commentary on Genesis by the way) Of course I don’t see definitive proof, but this is a theory I believe is true.
There are solutions and problems in this theory. It solves the problem of “How did Moses know all that stuff?” if Moses wrote Genesis. But it also brings up the problem of languages. If this written record goes back to Adam then it was written down BEFORE the tower of babel and the confusion of the languages. That means that Moses could understand the original language of the earth. Now that is not that hard to explain, either God gave Moses that linguistic ability, or the original language of the earth was a language Moses already spoke. Could it be that the original language of the earth was Hebrew or whatever form of Hebrew the children of Israel spoke at this time? Or was it at least close enough that Moses could figure it out?
Anyhow, that is my 2 cents worth (do we calculate that by the word)
Look at that definition 1 a, “The account of men.” I believe that the implication is clear that these accounts were given by the individuals named in each section. Do they also record the genealogical information of those listed? Yes they do.1) descendants, results, proceedings, generations, genealogies
a) account of men and their descendants
1) genealogical list of one's descendants
2) one's contemporaries
3) course of history (of creation etc)
b) begetting or account of heaven (metaph)
Me4Him said:Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
If you interpret this verse to mean that everything "Spiritual" has a "physical" counterpart here in the world, that can be seen/understood, you'll find the answer to a lot of "mysteries".
Here's some examples.
1. God, the "Spirit", was manifest in the world. (Jesus)
2. Spirit is compared with "WIND/AIR".
Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
Ac 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind,
3. The seven day week is God's plan for the Earth.
Ex 23:12 Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day (MK) thou shalt rest:
4. Farmers plants a "Seed" in the earth for "bread".
God planted a "SEED" in the earth for "Spiritual Bread".
Joh 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life:
Let's look at one for which Christians have been laughed at, a "FLAT EARTH".
Of course a flat earth would mean "NO MOUNTIANS", not a "flat planet".
"Mountains" in scripture are the symbol representing "KINGDOMS".
Joe 3:17 So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.
We read Rev/Isa and find that during the trib, and prior to Jesus return, mountains disappear, and every valley is Exhalted (raise up) and every hill made low,
Re 16:20 And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found.
Isa 40:4 Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low:
This result in a "FLat Earth", the only exception being the "ONE KINGDOM", the "HOLY MOUNT(ian) from which Jesus reigns.
Exactly what the three wise men seen in the stars, I have no idea, but evidently they seen/understood this connection between the "Spiritual" and "physical" worlds, as did many of the "early people" on the earth.
Knowledge which modern man has lost.
Why would you do that? There is no warrant for that whatsoever. The verse simply means that by looking at creation, no one claim that there is no God. They are without excuse.Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
If you interpret this verse to mean that everything "Spiritual" has a "physical" counterpart here in the world, that can be seen/understood
Pastor Larry said:Why would you do that? There is no warrant for that whatsoever. The verse simply means that by looking at creation, no one claim that there is no God. They are without excuse.
No, it is called illustration, not pattern. There is no pattern involved. But Rom 1:21 doesn't fit that anyway.Me4Him said:Jesus used the "natural things" of the world to teach "spiritual things", because they are related in "patterns".
An illustration of the necessity of dying to self.Joh 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
This was about the establishment of time.Ge 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, (SUN) and the lesser light to rule the night: (Moon) he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
No he didn't.Jesus, (Spiritual light of the world) came into the world on the "FOURTH DAY",
This is all completely without warrant. It is unbiblical.Moon=an assemble of God's people. (let your light shine)
Stars=Children of God (shine like the stars)
Every "religion" in the world is some form of "preverted" Christianity.
Worship the "SUN" instead of the "SON".
Human sacrifices vs Jesus crucified
Reincarnation vs Resurrection
Astrology vs true meaning of scripture.
The problem is prior to that. You can't just make up stuff from Scripture like you are doing."Rightly dividing" between the "two" is the problem.
Pastor Larry said:No, it is called illustration, not pattern. There is no pattern involved. But Rom 1:21 doesn't fit that anyway.
An illustration of the necessity of dying to self.
This was about the establishment of time.
No he didn't.
This is all completely without warrant. It is unbiblical.
The problem is prior to that. You can't just make up stuff from Scripture like you are doing.
Having preached through Genesis in the last two years, I am convinced of that. However, it has nothing to do with Isaiah 46:10, which is talking about something entirely different.Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done,
There's a lot more in Genesis than you realize.
Pastor Larry said:Having preached through Genesis in the last two years, I am convinced of that. However, it has nothing to do with Isaiah 46:10, which is talking about something entirely different.