genocide as commanded by God?

[sag38]

The Bible tells us directly when something is allegory. Otherwise we are to take it as being literal. If not then we get into picking and choosing what we want to be real and that which we don't. And, when that happens let's just chunk the Bible in the trash can because it's just become another useless religious book full of pithy little stories.

 

[The Scribe]

Absolutely incorrect. Parts of the Bible are clearly allegory and parable. Even Jesus taught using parables. This binary mindset is an open door to error.

2 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

You either believe the scriptures 100% or nothing.

Just more secularism from you.

 

[gekko]

haha. gotta love how this thread turned into a:

"yes it is!" vs. "no it isn't!" debate...

 

[Matt Black]

That statement is not conflated...let me say in a different way: The Bible is BOTH "inerrant AND literal". All I want to know is WHICH part of "all" do you consider literal? Do you interpret God's inerrant Word "literally" or do you "pick out for yourself" which portions of the Bible you consider"literal"?

Either you believe all of God's Word to be BOTH literal and inerrant or you don't believe any of it. You just don't "pick and choose" what you want to believe is "literal". God does not give you that option.

Linda I'm mystified by your assertion - why on earth does it have to be both inerrant and literal? The Bible doesn't claim that for itself so I'm interested as to why you and your hubby - who presumably adopt a sola scriptura approach - should believe something extra scriptura...?

 

[Matt Black]

The Bible tells us directly when something is allegory. Otherwise we are to take it as being literal.

I'm not sure it doesn, old son - what about eg: the Wisdom literature like Job and The Song of Solomon? Are they poetry or historical/literal?

If not then we get into picking and choosing what we want to be real and that which we don't. And, when that happens let's just chunk the Bible in the trash can because it's just become another useless religious book full of pithy little stories.

...which is why of course we need the Church...

 

[Alcott]

WhThe Bible is either "all inerrant and literal" or none of it is.

Then are you a literal branch or do you have nothing to do with Christ, who is a literal vine? And what kind of leaves or fruit grow on you? Good for juice? Let me have a taste.

 

[Matt Black]

Nice one!:laugh:

 

[282Mikado]

which is why of course we need the Church...

And where do you find this is your Bible? I don't need the church for anything...PERIOD.

I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. John 10:9

And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. Acts 2:21


Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Acts 4:12

etc., etc. The way to salvation is through Jesus Christ and through Jesus Christ alone. I need no man made institution to lead me along, no priest to confess too, no infant baptism to adhere to, no traditions to obey.

You say tradition interprets the Bible. Are you then saying the Pharisees had it all right in their traditions? The Roman Catholic Church?

Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? Matthew 15:1-3

For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
Mar 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. Mark 7:8-9

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col 2:8

Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 1Peter 1:18

Reading these verses (I know, they probably aren't literal) I would have to say God is not too keen on tradition keeping us in line with His will.

I think God is pretty clear on where in His word He is literal and where he is not. If it is a parable ( as in the above vine branch comment) or a dream, then we can take it as a figurative message meant to convey a specific meaning. Otherwise I believe it is pretty well all quite literal.

I asked a few question in an earlier posting. How do you stand on these:

Revelations (especially the tribulation). Will the people really suffer as foretold? (Now I realize allegory is used throughout Revelations, but I believe it is used to describe things (like our modern warfare) that John could not possibly convey without it. (How would John know about tanks or helicopters, etc.)

Do you believe in hell or is that just a figurative fairy tale?

Does it matter that someone get saved in order to get into heaven?

If the unsaved can't get into heaven, where do they go?

Do you believe in hell?
If so, how can you justify loving God subjecting one person to anywhere that causes weeping and gnashing of teeth?

What happens to Satan in the end? Surely not a real lake of fire. How inhumane.

Come to think of it, is there really a Satan? That doesn't make much sense for God to allow us to be tormented by such an evil being.

How do you decide what is literal and what is not?

 

[Matt Black]

And where do you find this is your Bible? I don't need the church for anything...PERIOD.

Oh but you do - how do you know for example that the book you hold in you hand calling itself "The Bible" is indeed the Bible?

I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

John 10:9

And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. Acts 2:21


Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Acts 4:12

etc., etc. The way to salvation is through Jesus Christ and through Jesus Christ alone. I need no man made institution to lead me along, no priest to confess too, no infant baptism to adhere to, no traditions to obey.

OK, if you want to engage in a (ultimately futile) battle of the proof texts, then I'll throw back at you Matt 16:18, Mark 16:16, & Acts 2:38 for starters

You say tradition interprets the Bible. Are you then saying the Pharisees had it all right in their traditions? The Roman Catholic Church?

Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? Matthew 15:1-3

For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
Mar 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. Mark 7:8-9

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col 2:8

Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 1Peter 1:18

Reading these verses (I know, they probably aren't literal) I would have to say God is not too keen on tradition keeping us in line with His will.

Again, proof-texting, I Cor 11:2, II Thess 2:15. And who mentioned the Roman Catholic Church? Not me, so why did you?

I think God is pretty clear on where in His word He is literal and where he is not. If it is a parable ( as in the above vine branch comment) or a dream, then we can take it as a figurative message meant to convey a specific meaning. Otherwise I believe it is pretty well all quite literal.

You and I evidently disagree on how much is parabolic and how much isn't. There are other genres of Biblical literature though

I asked a few question in an earlier posting. How do you stand on these:

Revelations (especially the tribulation). Will the people really suffer as foretold? (Now I realize allegory is used throughout Revelations, but I believe it is used to describe things (like our modern warfare) that John could not possibly convey without it. (How would John know about tanks or helicopters, etc.)

Probably; I tend to be agnostic on eschatology as each position can cite its own Scriptures to back up it's own position. "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and His kingdom will have no end" tends to be good enough for me.

Do you believe in hell or is that just a figurative fairy tale?

I believe in Hell as a place where God is not

[quote[Does it matter that someone get saved in order to get into heaven?[/quote] Yes, but there's more to salvation than just a free entry pass into heaven.

If the unsaved can't get into heaven, where do they go?

Define 'unsaved'.

Do you believe in hell?

Why repeat the question? Yes.

If so, how can you justify loving God subjecting one person to anywhere that causes weeping and gnashing of teeth?

Because that person will have deliberately and consciously chosen to reject God, and therefore it would be a violation of that individual's free will to force him or her to spend eternity with God, ergo Hell is the only alternative destination.

What happens to Satan in the end? Surely not a real lake of fire. How inhumane.

Banished from God's presence for all eternity.

Come to think of it, is there really a Satan? That doesn't make much sense for God to allow us to be tormented by such an evil being.

The existence of Satan is necessary for us to have totally free will.

How do you decide what is literal and what is not?

I've already told you - through the Church.

 

[282Mikado]

how do you know for example that the book you hold in you hand calling itself "The Bible" is indeed the Bible?

I need a man to tell me the Bible is true? I'd rather trust in God:

The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. Psalms 12:6

OK, if you want to engage in a (ultimately futile) battle of the proof texts,

This is probably true as you seem to have God in a Matt Black preformed mold, and anything you see in scripture that does not fit into that mold can not be a part of your pre-defined religion so you dismiss it as mere symbolism.

I mentioned the RCC because your close affinity to the church and tradition fits right in line with what they teach.

 

[Matt Black]

OK, let me rephrase the question re the Bible for you: how do you know that the New Testament contains the exact 27 books you have in your Bible? How do you know that Revelation and James are in, but that the Gospel of Thomas and the Acts of Peter are out?

And, BTW, 'my picture' of God is not one I've concocted myself but one revealed through Scripture and Tradition. Please don't ever accuse me of that one again.

 

[282Mikado]

OK, let me rephrase the question re the Bible for you: how do you know that the New Testament contains the exact 27 books you have in your Bible? How do you know that Revelation and James are in, but that the Gospel of Thomas and the Acts of Peter are out?

Because I believe God's word:
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. Psalms 12:6-7

I don't think it is out of His capabilities to preserve His word through the Majority Text and into the English of the KJV. He promises He would keep His word and I believe Him. It goes deeper than that, but I do not have time to go into a full blown KJV defense that has been repeated countless times elsewhere.

...my picture' of God is ...one revealed through Scripture and Tradition.

What tradition?

 

[Matt Black]

But who assembled the MT? Who decided which writings went into it and which didn't? Do you even know about that process?

As to Tradition, I mean Sacred Tradition, not the traditions of men in Mark 7. For a fuller explanation, try here.

 

[282Mikado]

I've read a good portion of the linked thread and can only say we must agree to disagree. People much better versed than I have stated my case sufficiently and you aren't swayed by them so any addition I could possibly make would be just as fruitless and probably just cause me undue stress and anger. I don't need to go there. As a conservative IFB that is the way it usually goes when I come to this website so I believe this will be my last posting at Baptist Board.

May God be with you all!

God Bless,

282

 

[The Scribe]

Linda I'm mystified by your assertion - why on earth does it have to be both inerrant and literal? The Bible doesn't claim that for itself so I'm interested as to why you and your hubby - who presumably adopt a sola scriptura approach - should believe something extra scriptura...?

The Bible claims it is inerrant and should be taken literally. If all scripture is given by God, then it has to be God is perfect and doesn't lie.

2 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

OK, let me rephrase the question re the Bible for you: how do you know that the New Testament contains the exact 27 books you have in your Bible? How do you know that Revelation and James are in, but that the Gospel of Thomas and the Acts of Peter are out?

And, BTW, 'my picture' of God is not one I've concocted myself but one revealed through Scripture and Tradition. Please don't ever accuse me of that one again.

The other books that were not included are Agnostic writings, which are fakes.
Is this what you are referring to? History Channel

From what I've seen from you not only in this thread, you have concocted your own unbiblical vision of God.

 

[Matt Black]

I think you mean Gnostic writings. Again, I ask, how do you know they are Gnostic and not part of the Canon of Scripture? After all, they purport to be authored by Apostles just as the rest of the NT is.

If you want to write off my view of God as 'concocted' then that's a matter for you but I can assure you that my view is in accordance with Scripture and Tradition.

Mikado282, I hope you stick around. You'll find many here who agree with you pretty much 100%. Just not me (and a few others), but, hey, that's the whole point of it being a discussion board - to exchange ideas etc. Wouldn't it be a dull place if we all agreed 100% on everything.

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

Did God order the genocide of this thread?

 

[DHK]

Did God order the genocide of this thread?

No, but he permitted it. And therein is the great difference. We are not robots in the hand of God. He created each one of us with a choice. I have chosen to answer you, but I didn't have to.

 

[DHK]

I'm not sure it doesn, old son - what about eg: the Wisdom literature like Job and The Song of Solomon? Are they poetry or historical/literal?...which is why of course we need the Church...

Job lived around the time of Abraham. He was an actual person that existed in history. These events happened to him. The book is poetical. There is nothing to prevent a man (or for that fact more than one) in speaking in poetry. Or is it possible for an author to take the recorded conversation and put it in poetical form. Either way it happened. It happened without the Church. We know what we know precisely by sola scriptura and nothing else. Jesus believed in sola scriptura. "Search the Scriptures," he said.
"Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures neither the power of God."
There are many that fall into this mistake. They put their trust in fallible churches and institutions that have apostasized and fallen away into "vain traditions held by their fathers" instead of following the Word of God, by which you are born again. (1Pet. 1:18-24)

 

[DHK]

I believe in Hell as a place where God is not

The Bible says that God is not among the unsaved.
Do you address each unsaved person as "Hell."
According to the above statement you have no reason not to.