Page 4 of 5 (85 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >
This post has 84 Replies | 2 Followers

Posts 129
John McComb | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 4:03 PM

 

MJ. Smith:

"Obviously" is a marker for an underlying assumption that one considers to be self-evident. It is that underlying assumption I am trying to grasp.

Since I do not understand where "spiritual language" falls on the "literal language - figurative language" spectrum, I don't have a clue as to what you are trying to say. To guess at its meaning, I would have to fall back on the Jewish-Catholic-(marginally Orthodox) tradition of the four senses of scripture which clearly you don't mean. Why do I say "marginally Orthodox" - because typology flourished in Antioch and, hence, was a primary influence in the East. "Four senses" flourished in Alexandria and , hence, was a primary influence in the West. See The Power of the Word: In the Worshiping Church by John Breck.

Ha! M.J. you are such a generous soul.

Yours in Christ

John

Posts 47
Aaron Stevens | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 5:23 PM

This has been a great discussion, (and i don't discourage it it has been great reading) but we have kind of gotten of on a tangent from my original question:

I just want to know, What you believe the Behemoth is. And i know, as we have read over the past pages that everyone has different ways of getting their answer or conclusion. but just a show of hands (so to speak) of what each of you believe. Thanks

 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 5:36 PM

 

MJ. Smith:
Since I do not understand where "spiritual language" falls on the "literal language - figurative language" spectrum, I don't have a clue as to what you are trying to say. To guess at its meaning, I would have to fall back on the Jewish-Catholic-(marginally Orthodox) tradition of the four senses of scripture which clearly you don't mean.

"Spiritual language" is the Tropological sense.

I don't know why you can't loosely pigeon-hole me into the 4 senses as defined by the  Catholic Church Catechism 115-119. Two of my terms are exact, the other two are functionally similar.
literal = Literal,
allegorical = Allegory.
metaphorical = Tropological (literal pointing to the spiritual aka "Kingdom of God"
parabolic = Anagogical (or as the Church of Christ says "an earthly story with a heavenly meaning.")  but not exclusively to the future so much as who we (already) are in Christ.  This definition is my greatest digress from the "4 senses."

If you hold to the 4 senses how can you read about Behemoth in any of the last three? Once again I have to accept the Bible literally in this account. This time by process of elimination,

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 26540
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 5:43 PM

Matthew C Jones:
priesthood of all believers

You are, I assume, aware that the Catholic/Orthodox position is also that one is baptized as prophet, priest and king ... i.e. priesthood of all believers.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 5:43 PM

 

 

AaronStevens:

This has been a great discussion, (and i don't discourage it it has been great reading) but we have kind of gotten of on a tangent from my original question:

I just want to know, What you believe the Behemoth is. And i know, as we have read over the past pages that everyone has different ways of getting their answer or conclusion. but just a show of hands (so to speak) of what each of you believe. Thanks

A real creature of enormous size and strength, created by God. (Ditto for Leviathan.)  Coffee
Thanks for the lively thread, Aaron, MJ, George and John!

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 5:48 PM

MJ. Smith:

Matthew C Jones:
priesthood of all believers

You are, I assume, aware that the Catholic/Orthodox position is also that one is baptized as prophet, priest and king ... i.e. priesthood of all believers.

Actually, No. I did not know that. Good to learn something new.

Aaron wants his Behemoth back so I'll try to stop.........at least in this thread.  Big Smile

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 26540
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 5:59 PM

Matthew C Jones:
I don't know why you can't loosely pigeon-hole me into the 4 senses as defined by the  Catholic Church Catechism 115-119.

No problem placing you in the 4-senses if that's where you want to be. Generally "spiritual sense" is used to refer to the final three but I understand your use now and have no problem with it. It was your apparent equation of literal meaning = plain meaning that threw me.  My apologies.

From a review of Jaroslav Pelikan on Acts: "because biblical scholarship has become such a hydra-headed behemoth the only lack of the volume is depth and complexity of developments over the last 20-30 years." ... I think that is the closest to a visual picture that I'll go for (just kidding).

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 47
Aaron Stevens | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 6:01 PM

Matthew C Jones:

MJ. Smith:

Matthew C Jones:
priesthood of all believers

You are, I assume, aware that the Catholic/Orthodox position is also that one is baptized as prophet, priest and king ... i.e. priesthood of all believers.

Actually, No. I did not know that. Good to learn something new.

Aaron wants his Behemoth back so I'll try to stop.........at least in this thread.  Big Smile

Big Smile Thanks. Hey id don't mind the discussions that we have had, I have quite enjoyed it. Big Smile i just wanted to get a tally. and bring us back to the question, I know it's hard, the same as studying for teaching, you see something interesting and start digging and before you know it you way off from what you were initially studying.

Posts 129
John McComb | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 6:31 PM

 

Matthew C Jones:

Ditto for Leviathan.

I've been waiting for this forever.

 

Posts 9946
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 6:32 PM

Matthew C Jones:

My guiding principle here is - If a literal interpretation confllicts with other scripture we need to look deeper. I do know of instances where the literal is true as well as a deeper message. Isaiah's  prophecy "a young woman shall concieve" is an example of this. It's not willy-nilly. Jesus being the living bread, you might say, metaphorically speaking Mary had a bun in the oven.   Tongue Tied  (For those who may not be familiar with American idioms, that means Mary was pregnant.)

In other words, whatever makes it say what you want it to say.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 7:20 PM

George Somsel:

Matthew C Jones:

My guiding principle here is - If a literal interpretation confllicts with other scripture we need to look deeper. I do know of instances where the literal is true as well as a deeper message. Isaiah's  prophecy "a young woman shall concieve" is an example of this. It's not willy-nilly. Jesus being the living bread, you might say, metaphorically speaking Mary had a bun in the oven.   Tongue Tied  (For those who may not be familiar with American idioms, that means Mary was pregnant.)

  

In other words, whatever makes it say what you want it to say.

And I was trying oh so hard not to post off-topic again!  Sad

No George, there are a lot of literal scriptural renderings I wish were not true. Things like eternal punishmmet, persecution of Israel, beheading of saints in Rev 20, Herod's execution of babies; these are things I would rather not read literally. But the Bible is not my product. I am not God and I am sure He knows better.

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 26540
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 7:33 PM

Matthew C Jones:
literal scriptural renderings

As to why I prefer "plain meaning" from a site that cross many of my unacceptable lines - multi-colored, poorly formatted etc. http://www.lifedesign.ca/tru_bibleplain.html chosen simply as the first definition I ran into on a web search.

To know the truth (what actually happened)
we must honor...

The Plain Meaning of Scripture
dot
1. Is NOT the Wooden Literal Meaning
Taking every word in the Bible literally would be blind rebellion. As the world's best literature, the Bible is full of all kinds of non-literal language. Metaphors, similies, figures of speech, parables, visions, poetry and proverbs. Each of these methods were selected by the Master Communicator because it is better than an entirely literal Bible to reveal perfect truth. Our first task is to submit to His powerful use of language, not to overrule it in any way. Furthermore the plain meaning does not mean simple —the Bible is always profound.

 

2. Believes that the Bible Is What It Claims to be —God's Words
"No prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,
for no prophecy was ever made an act of human will,
but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."
2Pet.1:20,21

3. Honors The Greatest Communicator

Treat His words as if He Says What He Means and Means What He Says.
After all He taught,
"Let your Yea be Yea and your Nay be Nay."

4. Seeks ONLY the Author's Meaning

Never The Reader's Meaning
Always come to Scripture as a learner, never an expert. If the reader decides the meaning of words then the Author's meaning, right or wrong, can never reach the intended destination: the reader's mind.

 

5. Presupposes Common Word and Sentence Meanings
When the tempter used God's own words to test Jesus,
Jesus' simple "It is written" ended all negotiation. (Mat.4).
The prophets stopped semantic debate with,"Thus Saith the Lord."
Truth is in the words—never in the interpretation.
6. Follows the Universal Rules for Non-literal Language
The Bible is full of non-literal language governed by universal rules that guide the reader to the Author's meaning, never his own.
Mythology is treated as myth because that is what it claims to be.
Scripture claims to be an inerrant record of history —past, present and future.
It begins with, "In the beginning..." It does not begin with "Once upon a time..."
7. Draws Only Deeper Meaning Consistent with ALL of Scripture
Every historical event in Scripture has spiritual implications. History is the framework on which the Bible teaches spiritual truth. In this way we learn to apply spiritual principles back to our real life history.
Any secondary meaning will not contradict the plain meaning of the text. Inerrancy is horizontal —consistency between passages, and vertical —consistency between levels of meaning.

8. Tests for Doctrinal HARMONY

The Plain Meaning of Scripture does not hang for its life on semantics.
dot
We must also "Prove All Things" by

"comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

dot
testing every so-called 'interpretation' for doctrinal harmony.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 17 2009 8:03 PM

MJ,

That all looks real good to me. I could only improve on it with italics, underlining and a few emoticons.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 5564
Forum MVP
Rich DeRuiter | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Aug 18 2009 9:34 AM

AaronStevens:
What is Behemoth??

Apparently, a behemoth is a long, off-topic discussion, that takes on a life of it's own, and seeks to take the discussion as far off-topic as it can. They are all over this forum.

Does anyone know a really good exterminator?

[sigh]

 Help links: WIKI;  Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Aug 18 2009 10:48 AM

Richard DeRuiter:

AaronStevens:
What is Behemoth??

Apparently, a behemoth is a long, off-topic discussion, that takes on a life of it's own, and seeks to take the discussion as far off-topic as it can. They are all over this forum.

Does anyone know a really good exterminator?

[sigh]

Ummm...... Uh Huh  Confused

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 26540
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Aug 18 2009 12:00 PM

Richard DeRuiter:
a behemoth is a long, off-topic discussion

Definitely a possibility - but at least none of us pointed out that it may not be terrestial - God did create a whole universe you know, perhaps even all possible universes depending on your choice of physicists.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 352
Mike & Rachel Aubrey | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jan 31 2010 6:28 PM

Matthew C Jones:
Some cling to the "Gap theory"

"Cling" isn't a very fair word, is it?

Besides, that's not the only view -- cf. John Walton's new book: The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate.

Posts 403
777 | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jan 31 2010 8:04 PM

Matthew C Jones:

AaronStevens:
in Genesis chapter 1 is when God created everything, God created all the land animals and Man on day 6, now is a dinosaur a land animal?? Of course it is, so both man and dinosaurs co-existed

 

I totally agree with you Aaron.

But not everybody takes the six day creation as 6 literal 24 hour periods.  Some cling to the "Gap theory" believing there were possibly millions of years between a failed original creation/evolution and the Garden of Eden narrative. Who knows, they may even believe God created Adam as a newborn baby and he had to grow up through all stages of child development. (Evolving into a mature man.....Wink)

 

The "gap theory" actually makes more sense than thinking that the earth is literally 6,000 years old.  For those that are unfamiliar with the gap theory, wikipedia has a little write-up regarding it here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_theory

The Hebrew completely supports there being a gap in time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.   In Genesis 1:2 we see that the earth BECAME tohu wa bohu http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tohu_wa-bohu  yet nobody ever seems to get around to reading Isaiah 45:18 in the Hebrew to find that God did not create the earth that way.  They further do not read Jeremiah 4:23 where the casting down of the last age is narrated nor do they bother to read 2 Peter chapter 3 starting with about verse 5 where Peter speaks about the previous age.  Take into account that Satan was once good and held high estate but fell from grace and is sentenced by name to die yet in the book of Genesis in the garden he is already evil.  So, when was he good if there was not an age on this earth before this present one?

Just about any scientist/geologist that has to deal with reality knows that the earth is billions of years old.  The Bible is reality AND the age of this earth is really much more than 6,000 years.  Having faith in God doesn't mean that you have to believe dumb things like the earth being only 6,000 years old.  This current age may only be a few thousand years old, but the earth was created by God a long, long time ago and the Bible supports it.  And it's not "clinging" to any theory - God Himself says that He did not make it as it is in Genesis 1:2 (read the Isaiah reference).  Why would God create something tohu wa bohu?  The gap "theory" is not a theory, it happens to be truth.

Since you chose to use the word CLING, I felt it A-OK to offer a rebuttal in truth.  I fully realize that these forums are not for theological debate, but I WILL stick up for truth when I see someone make light of it.

Oh, and the behemoth happens to be a dinosaur.  God made those and they lived here on earth millions of years ago.  That happens to be a scientific fact.  The description of the behemoth will ONLY fit a dinosaur.  Having faith in the Word doesn't mean that you have to believe stupid things.

Mike

Posts 98
Tim Lord | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 1 2010 11:28 AM

I say that as our understanding grows when it comes to difficult passages of the Bible, we should be willing to adjust our interpretive framework, where it may be needed, and with that, please revv up your Logos Bible software and check out this article by Mortenson in The Master’s Seminary Journal 18/1 (Spring 2007): 69-98.  You can purchase Volume 11 of the Theological Journal Library from Logos if you do not have this article, or you can view it online by clicking here.  There is also a companion article by Mortenson comparing what the views of various authors of systematic theologies profess, such as this resource available from Logos by Wayne Grudem, by clicking here.

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 1 2010 4:55 PM

MikeM:
Since you chose to use the word CLING, I felt it A-OK to offer a rebuttal in truth.  I fully realize that these forums are not for theological debate, but I WILL stick up for truth when I see someone make light of it.

 

Mike, Only way you can guarantee the "gap theory" is TRUTH is if you are God (which you are not), OR, You are behemoth (& was there to witness it all, which you didn't.)

My God is big enough to have created Adam as a fully matured adult male (if God so wanted to) and my God is big enough to have created the whole "sha-Bang" to appear as if it is "BBBBillions & BBBBilions" of years old. Just go ask Carl Sagan. I have met mere mortals who claim to have a corner on the TRUTH. But Hawkings, Einstien, Feynman et. al. usually leave room to be wrong. And in Hawkings case he had to eat crow and admit he was wrong (first edition of Brief Hstory of Time.)

Cling away! Wink  I have always maintained Behemoth is a dinosaur & Leviathan too. You neglect the geological facts that show catastrophic (fast) changes can give the illusion of millions of years when only taking a decade or two. I lived at the base of an active volcano and climbed many more. I have been fascinated with geology & botany since childhood and seen rock petrify quickly, coal develop in 16 years, and luminescent moss feeding off new lava rock.

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. Proverbs 25:2

Whether you are right or not makes no difference to me. I am content to believe God made it all. I don't need to prove His details.

(notice how I worked in a big "BANG"? Clever, huh?)

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Page 4 of 5 (85 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS