Bible Questions?

why did God reject Cains Offering?

 

According to the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Law was a reminder of human sins until the fulfillment of the Law in the Incarnation, crucifixion and ressurection of Jesus.

 

I agree. The climate is very complicated and not completely understood. However, it doesn't change the fact that CO2 levels(380ppmv) are higher than they've been in 650,000 years. How do you know it won't have an effect since all the variables are interrelated? My mind isn't made up on issue. Sorry OWB. I couldn't resist.






[/QUOTE]

 

I don't know if I'm reading your chart right but it seems like Co2 and temperature mirror each other and dust appears to have little effect on either.

 

Yeah, it doesn't mirror as closely, but if you look as all the major peaks in temperature/CO2 the dust is near the bottom of the range.

In 1816 the volcano Tambora in Indonesia erupted and snow was reported in New England in June and July killing crops, so it can have an effect. Usually only short term.

 

Thanks, I looked again and it seems that when dust was at it's highest, temperature/CO2 appear to be at their lowest.

 

When looking at various translations the name of Moses does not appear in several and in several others the name is in parentheses which would seem to mean the the name Moses does not appear in the original language manuscripts and was added at the translator's discretion.

 

Man, those translations again! That could really make a difference in understanding God and the Bible. (Do you ever wonder why, if God wants to communicate his will to us this way, He doesn't do something about these messed up translations?) But I think the point is the same, isn't it? God was trying to kill somebody for some reason and didn't. The reason God was angry was presumably because somebody neglected to circumcise a boy during the prescribed period under Abrahamic law (although we don't know that for sure; it's an inference)--a horrific penalty for such an infraction and one which was not prescribed by Scripture. And the reason He didn't carry out the execution was because Zipporah was able promptly to perform the required task. Either we believe that God literally acted as described, which would make Him into a monster of limited power, or we believe as I do that this passage should be interpreted metaphorically/historically, like the kids mauled by the she bears, as indicating that God took the requirements of the law very seriously.

 

Just out of curiosity if it's not to personal, what caused your shift in the way you interpret it?

I haven't really noticed a drastic change in weather and in the past five years I've lived up and down on both coasts of the United States, is it more evident in other parts of the world?

But are they not drawing there conclusions from the same bible as you, what is it that's being lost in translation between these different sects?

Forgive me, but the meaning of this is a bit lost on me!

As in a literal hard rain?

From the heating of the oceans that are supposedly cooling down from theorized melting ice from the Arctic pole? Seems like one foot on the gas and another one on the brake.

Just for curiosities sake would you mind describing how you prophesying our possible imminent doom?

 

I thought the Bible was self-interpreting and did not suffer as a result of being translated.

Can you read Classical Greek, OWB? If not, how can you be sure that what you've read is really what you think you read?

 

Well we can agree on one thing God took the requirements of the Law very seriously.

But even if I were to agree with this being a "metaphorical" passage, you've still got it wrong. Seeing as this took place before the Law and it's requirements, this scripture can not be "indicating that God took the requirements of the law very seriously".

 

Are you asking why I once was a lot more skeptical of the Bible than I am now?

No one can say exactly what it looks like when a planet takes ill, but it probably looks a lot like Earth. Never mind what you've heard about global warming as a slow-motion emergency that would take decades to play out. Suddenly and unexpectedly, the crisis is upon us.

It certainly looked that way last week as the atmospheric bomb that was Cyclone Larry--a Category 4 storm with wind bursts that reached 125 m.p.h.--exploded through northeastern Australia. It certainly looked that way last year as curtains of fire and dust turned the skies of Indonesia orange, thanks to drought-fueled blazes sweeping the island nation. It certainly looks that way as sections of ice the size of small states calve from the disintegrating Arctic and Antarctic. And it certainly looks that way as the sodden wreckage of New Orleans continues to molder, while the waters of the Atlantic gather themselves for a new hurricane season just two months away. Disasters have always been with us and surely always will be. But when they hit this hard and come this fast--when the emergency becomes commonplace--something has gone grievously wrong. That something is global warming.

The image of Earth as organism--famously dubbed Gaia by environmentalist James Lovelock-- has probably been overworked, but that's not to say the planet can't behave like a living thing, and these days, it's a living thing fighting a fever. From heat waves to storms to floods to fires to massive glacial melts, the global climate seems to be crashing around us. Scientists have been calling this shot for decades. This is precisely what they have been warning would happen if we continued pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, trapping the heat that flows in from the sun and raising global temperatures.
Direct quote from Time Magazine

Yes, the same Bible but I'm not sure they're really interested in what it has to say and seem more interested in it saying what they want it to say.

This vitally important exposé shows how the Bush administration has systematically misled Americans on a wide range of scientific issues affecting public health, foreign policy, and the environment by ignoring, suppressing, manipulating, or even distorting scientific research. It is the first book to focus exclusively on how this explosive issue has played out during the Presidency of George W. Bush and the first to comprehensively document his administration's abuses of science.
In 2001, a group of eminent American scientists affiliated with the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) contacted Seth Shulman, an experienced investigative journalist, to look into charges of serious mishandling of scientific information in the current administration. Shulman's investigation resulted in the groundbreaking report "Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policy Making," which served as the basis for a highly publicized UCS scientists' statement accusing the Bush administration of a misuse of science that was signed by dozens of Nobel laureates, National Medal of Science recipients, and members of the National Academy of Sciences. To date, more than 8,000 scientists across the country have signed the statement based upon Shulman's reporting. This book, drawing upon scores of interviews and including never-released information, goes beyond the UCS report to document the Bush administration's suppression and distortion of science, bringing this issue to a wider audience.
a Synopsis of the book: Undermining Science: Suppression and Distortion in the Bush Administration by Seth Shulman

As in a quote from an old Bob Dylan song

and this sounds like a quote from the Dire Straits song The Bug:
well it`s a strange old game - you learn it slow
one step forward and it`s back to go
you`re standing on the throttle
you`re standing on the breaks
in the groove `til you make a mistake

"All I Know is what I read in the papers."

 

It only suffers from people who have agendas, as I've mentioned before.

Yes but very very slowly. And actually that would be Kione Greek, not classical Greek.

 

So that'll be "everyone" then?

 

any on3?

 

Before the Abrahamic covenant? I have a feeling we're being set up for another hairsplitting exercise. I used the world "law" with reference to the Abrahamic covenant which included circumcision. That's why Muslims as well as Jews observe it. I was clear, I think, how I was using the term and to what I was referring. In return for the Land of Canaan, every male in Abraham's household must be circumcised as a sign of the covenant. The provisions of covenants are ordinarily considered law. So what is it that you're taking issue with? Did you think I was talking about the law of Moses? In the sense I was using the term, this scripture can too be "indicating that God took the requirements of the law very seriously".

 

Yes, and what areas of it were you skeptical about?

If admittedly you say no one would know what an Ill planet looked like, what would lead you to believe that it would resemble ours?

 

I guess you haven't been reading your own thread and missed the more detailed account of how thisw seems to work.

 

The Bible doesn't really say but since God had already begin correcting what had happened through the sacrifice of his son perhaps this was showing that a life would have to be given to make up for the life that had been thrown away.

 

I'm sorry, I do not consider the Abrahamic covenant to be the "law" and so not knowing that you did, I commented foolishly. Again I apologize.