Bible Questions?

You said:

You are the one that made the statement parenthetic and so you are the one putting words in the speakers mouth.

 

Parenthetic means added as an extra commentary. The word therefore is a parenthetic prefix.
Parenthesis are the little marks on the paper.

 

You later cite Revelation 22:13

It would seem to me that it is Jesus saying he is the Alpha and Omega in this part:

""Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End...I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star...He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus."

I do not understand how you can justify saying that god and Jesus are addressed as being the same thing (the First and the Last) but it means something different for Jesus than God. Doesn't Alpha and Omega mean "first and last" albeit not literally but in the spirit of the phrase?

 

Thanks, I never knew.

I believe that what is written in the Bible is the Word of God and so the one writing it down is not making an extra or added commentary because, unless you feel that God does not have the ability to control his own words, what was written is exactly what should have been written. So that would mean that by your saying; "That parenthetic comment turns a statement concerning the workings of the inner man into a comment on religious practice. The writer put words in the speakers mouth." You are the one trying to put words in the speakers mouth. Thus the question; So why did you do it?

 

Well I certainly won't argue with belief. That would be like asking directions from a sock. Does God have a mouth?

What comes out of a man is the working of the inner man.

Perhaps trade your belief for reading comprehension skills.

 

I am interested to know then, does the weight of Paul's comment make you believe in a many thousand years long creation?

I've been reading up on the Greek behind the passage. What I find of interest is the grammatical features that are somewhat lost in the translated version of Hebrews that I have read. That being the relationship between the words είσελθών ("having entered") κατέπαυσεν ("rest").
A very literal translation of verse 10 would be this:

The part about "entering" his rest sounds to me like when we "enter" heaven we will be able to rest from our heavy labour as God did after he had finished creation, rather then equating to the seventh day of creation. Indeed Hebrews 4:1 also refers to heaven as "God's Rest". The idea of rest is like the passage Matthew 11:28-30 which gives a sense of rest from our labours upon giving ourselves to the Lord.

Just my 2 cents, I'd like to know your opinion of this.

 

Well, perhaps one day your reading comprehension skills will allow you to actually follow the conversation, so that your posts will be more than tangent comments, perhaps not.

 

I cannot account for your estimation of my impertinence. Your familiarity with Biblical letter far exceeds mine.
My guide is the practice of Christ. I speak of these things as I am instructed by life amidst the Holy Spirit. I speak as I am spoken to, I teach as I am taught.
Our parents, our leaders, our institutions and traditions teach us one thing, the ways of mammon.
There is another teacher in the world that is not apparent yet descends upon us with tongues of fire if we learn to listen instead of ponder. No man teaches me these things.

 

Yes. This doesn't mean that I don't think God could not have created the entire Universe instantaneously but with Paul's comment, I just don't think he did and that 50,000 years seems to bring what the Bible says into harmony with what scientists have found.

Seems reasonable.

I have found that the beginning of Genesis is the key to understanding the entire Bible and God's purposes. After reading Genesis what would you say God original purpose for mankind was? Was it to die and go to heaven or was it to live forever on a paradise Earth? Would you say that Adam and Eve had "entered" into God's rest before they sinned?

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

Our original purpose would have been to live in paradise, and have an easy trouble-free life with God. Unfortunately this idea got a little screwed up.
I remember talking to someone (a Catholic woman) who believed that the Garden of Eden was heaven itself on Earth, but obviously we were banished from this after the first sins. She believes once we die we will find ourselves back in the Garden. I don't know if I would necessarily subscribe to her way of thinking, though.

 

Well, aside from your posts being more tangent than aimed at the heart of the matter, I would not say your comments are impertinent. Impertinence carries with it a sense of not being appropriate and being rude and showing a lack of respect, none of which would I say characterizes your post.

As to you your life guidance, each person must decide for themselves how to guide their lives others can only make suggestions. My only suggestion for you take it or leave it is: However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to YOU as good news something beyond what we declared to YOU as good news, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8)

 

Are you suggesting that authority can only be found in the voice of the pontifical church? I do not call upon anyone to believe anything. I call upon a choice exceeding belief. We practice not because we believe in the words but because the words are true.

 

Delayed perhaps but when God purposes to do something, I don't think anything can change that purpose.

I don't see anywhere God's original purpose had to do with mankind going to Heaven. So the Garden of Eden was not Heaven on Earth but an example of the paradise the the Earth was meant to be under perfect mankind's stewardship, a place where mankind would be happy to live forever.

 

I'm not sure where you got this idea but I do suggest that the Bible, the Word of God, is the authority we should turn to.

Okay.

 

This is similar to official Catholic teaching, as I can find. Heaven is seen as a state of the beatific vision, in which we are in the glorious presence of the Lord.

This definitely describes Adam, those in Heaven prior to the Resurrection of the Dead, and those living eternally on the New Earth with their united souls and bodies. http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap090600.htm This gives a pretty good explanation.

I am really interested in the idea of the New Earth and Heaven and what, if any, is the difference. I may go ask one of the priests I know about this.

 

Genesis

How long did it take Adam to name the millions of varying species on Earth?

2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever
Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

 

Musta been a real long time, huh?

How long do you think it took?


-

 

A new one, thanx.

A couple of things, one, he didn't have to necessarily name every variation of animals, the scripture is somewhat vague on how many he named, so he could have said sheep and that could have covered all the variations of sheep that exist.

Also the expression, "all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field" seems to be saying that Adam was at that time was only naming the larger birds and animals.

As for the; "whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof." that could just mean that if Adam named something that is what it would be called not necessarily that at that time he named every living creature.

But even with that all in mind, it probably took a quite a while.

 

It's also before the fall, so he could have taken his sweet time and it would not matter

 

What did Abraham do with all the extra foreskins?

Why did he feel it necessary to perform all the "surgeries" in just one day?

Abraham circumcises himself and all of the males in his household.

Since he supposedly had 318 slaves back in 14:14, poor old Abe must have been pretty busy with his knife. But it was worth it. Penises are supremely important to God. And he can't stand foreskins. 17:23-24

Genesis
14:14 And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan.

17:23 And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him.