First of all who are we to say that any of our opinions are right. Can we say that we know for “fact” anything of God. We only have a small portion of God and what He has shown us in our experiences with Him. That is were we ust put our faith in Christ to show us the right path to take.

My opinion would have to be that God made a partner for the man and that the garden may have been literal but mostly represented being in the full presence of God. A place or peace and no worries. The 7 days I do not think they were 24 hour days becasue our sense of time is much different than Gods. 2 Peter 3:8 puts a prespective on time to God. So this could mean that the 7 days of Creation were really 7000 years; but does it really matter?!!

To answer the the question of the title, No. Many times is Jesus’s life on Earth he told stories or parabels, which by definition are “a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson. To continue the vocab lesson allegorical means “figurative”, which means “not literal”. So we cannot take every word literally but we have to take what God has given us and be in relatonship with Him and receive direction from Him about His truth and what we should learn from the Bible. Jesus teaches us princples to live by and to follow and that we have a choice to follow them or not.

But really does it matter if we take it as literal or not? What we think about this topic should not effect the mission that God has given us; Matt 22:37-38, Love God, Love People (short version). What matters is our relationship with Christ and our response to Him.

Which of these, or some other view, do you believe?

Are you tolerant of any of the other views?

What do you think might be the consequences of holding to any of the other views?

Would any of you care to answer the questions in the quote at the beginning of this article?

ADDITIONAL ADDED QUESTION…Does any of this matter as far as our mission goes?

If the bible is in fact the truth that we claim then you have to believe in one of the first two opinions. Are there any consequences to not viewing the right view? I’m wouldn’t think so. The only consequence I can see coming from this is if you let these questions make you not believe in God. You can’t just believe Genesis didn’t happen. If so you are turning from the truth immediately. You can take it literal, but if you do you need to read the rest of the bible.

2 Peter 3:8 (KJV)
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I am undecided between the first and second opinions. We cannot base God on our scheme of time. He very well could have created all of this in “our” one day. But he could have also done it all in a thousand years at a time. Our mission is to show Christ and to inform the “unsaved” of him, in hope of them becoming Christians. A question of God’s power should not sway us from our faith in a our God the creator.

Which of these, or some other view, do you believe?
I think God created everything and in the order he said and that man and dinosaurs probably did live at the same time, as far as I can tell there is no time line given for how long Adam and Eve were in the garden before eating of the tree. I hold that it is possible that everything was created in six days and that Adam and Eve lived in the garden away from the dinosaurs and protected from whatever destroyed the dinosaurs before the fall. If no time was mentioned then it could have been any amount of time, right? If the account is literal then my theory is “still” possible right? Did I miss something? It seems to me that people are not looking at the whole story. And if it wasnt a literal 6 days, that doesnt mean that other parts of the story are not literal. It doesnt mean that Adam and Eve didnt live. You have to remember that this story was passed down by word of mouth and was not recorded for many many years, maybe pieces are a little hazy maybe the writer recorded the version he heard and things got left out. As Justin pointed out Job makes mention of creatures or dinosaurs, if you will, and I believe that Job is the older book of the two. Im not saying I am completely right, I dont know and to answer another of the questions I think the consequences of believing something different are that we believe something different, Im saved, youre saved, God didnt keep me out of the kingdom because I believe something different. I still believe in creation and for me that is enough, I dont have to have all the answers, I am perfectly fine with waiting til I get to heaven to learn some things. Tolerant, well I am willing to let people believe what they will, if I think they are totally off on something that would send their soul to hell, like Jesus isnt the only way then we have something to worry about, but I dont think this particular topic is sending tons of people to hell, really.

[“The reason Jesus gave for a man marrying a woman is the historical account of Adam and Eve…Was Jesus wrong? Is there a Biblical historical basis for a man marrying a woman?]

Obviously Jesus was not wrong. I think Jesus would say that a man should marry a women because Jesus/God said that is the right way, not because Jesus believed that Adam the first man married a women. Historical basis???? God said, enough written!

Does it matter to the mission? It matters when someone that you are trying to win to God specifically ask you one of these same questions because to them it matters, then it should matter to you. But, people should be understanding enough to realize that we are human and that just being a christian doesnt make you all knowing or a biblical scholar. You just need to show them that they matter to you that if you dont know the answer that you care enough about them and their concerns to try and find the right answer. All the time letting them know what we know that these points dont have to keep them from Heaven, that Jesus is the way, that Salvation is theirs for the asking..

Sorry about writing a novel…

Heath: “I hold that it is possible that everything was created in six days and that Adam and Eve lived in the garden away from the dinosaurs and protected from whatever destroyed the dinosaurs before the fall. If no time was mentioned then it could have been any amount of time, right?”Actually, the bible does say that Adam lived 930 years, so one would assume that this is from the time he was created.

The bible does say that Adam lived 930 years. Was that actual life span, or was that how long he lived starting with his birth into sin?

If I may be so bold as to answer for Sonny:

“You say you don’t believe that the literal history as recorded in Genesis is necessarily true. Why then do you believe the other things in Genesis are true? Why do you believe God created anything?”

Answer: Faith.

“How do I decide which parts to believe and which parts to disbelieve?”

Answer: Faith.

Now a question for the interrogator:

How does someone believe in a literal understanding of an unscientific account of creation written by a pre-enlightened mind as recounted to him through oral tradition and then declare this to be the word of God?

Answer: Faith.

Tell me Justin, why is it that your faith is so much more valid than Sonny’s?

Sonny,

There are many places in the Bible that appear on the surface to be contradictory. Most have been explained satisfactorily and are not in fact contradictions. I have read explanations of many of the most glaring examples. Some explanations are not credible but some are. Maybe it would be a good idea to start a thread about the supposed contradictions in the Bible to see if there are answers. It would take the rest of our lives because there is always the next question. I think I have read about the ones you listed and the explanation made sense to me. Right now I don’t see the point because there is a much more important issue of a different scale I think.

You say you don’t believe the first 11 chapters of Genesis are literal.

Enoch and Noah are written of in the first 11 chapters of Genesis.

Enoch is listed as one of the faithful in Hebrews.
Enoch is listed in Luke in the genealogy of Jesus.
Enoch is referenced in Jude
Noah is referenced in Isaiah, Ezekiel, Hebrews, 1 Peter and 2 Peter
Jesus spoke of Noah in Matthew and Luke

All these references are stated as if Noah and Enoch were actual historical figures.

These are not all the references to Genesis 1-11 in the Bible. There are more. Where do you stop with picking the parts of the Bible you don’t believe?

Concerning doubt. Doubt is not sin. I would ask someone to point me to that scripture. I can point to many scriptures that commend people in their doubt. One man was commended by Jesus when he said “I believe, help thou mine unbelief.” The Bible is full of men of great faith who doubted at one time. Sin is when you doubt and turn away. You are doing well when you study the issue. There are answers if you look for them.

Sonny: If his age as listed was from the time of his “death from sin”, which is not a birth by any sense of the word, then what is the reason for even mentioning it. If we are to start dividing life and death then he was dead for 930 years, not alive.

If you view Adam and Eve in the same aspect as we are, then were they accountable? They were not born into sin, but when sin was in their presence, did they know the difference between right and wrong? Yes God told them, but did they have a mind of accountability. I can tell my kids all day long that they shouldn’t do something, but they have no clue how to comprehend punishment when they’ve never gone against the rules I’ve given them; or even right or wrong to say the least. In experience, they learn that daddy means what he says. Is this not the case here? Were they really accountable for what they did?

With that being said, in our view of life, we die and are birthed again; regardless of which way it is. We are born into sin. Then, if we choose to, we are born again in Christ. If ever comes the time that we decide to turn our backs on God, we are then dead from Christ but alive in our sin.

This could get drawn out. I’m actually more curious about the first paragraph that I wrote. I know this is a different type question, but another view about things.

One of the biggest problems I have with this belief system is that it is not flexible. As in “it’s my way, or your wrong”

As stated before, if there is only one type of person getting into heaven then God is not who he claims he is in the Bible.

I just don’t see how some people can justify themselves, and live with the fact that while they may be devout, and serving the lord, that they are in turn actually driving people away with their hard nosed “it this way or no way” attitude.

Jesus who is the basis for how we should all act was a man of all people, not just the people who followed exactly what he taught. He had disciples of many backgrounds and beliefs, and even after they were his disciples they did not all share the exact same views on the world.

For example: In John chapter 13 where he describes Jesus washing the feet of the disciples. Why is John the only one to mention this? Was it not as important to Matthew, Mark, or Luke? does it take away the credibility that John is the only one to mention it? or does it point to the fact that the disciples got different things from Jesus himself? Your call.

Each one of us has the free will and the ability to pick out what is important to us, and what will get us closer to God, while at the same time following the laws and commands of Jesus. All else is just fluff for the intellectual crew to discuss.

I love the discussions, but driving a wedge between belief systems is crazy, just open up to the fact that the other viewpoints are just as valid. If you are not able to believe that God is still working for us and with us, then you are lost. If the Bible is taken literally word for word, then God is done, and he is just waiting on us to finish up down here without a care for what goes on day to day. But of course that also leads back into foreknowledge. That can be addressed later, again.

And to Sonny, I know we don’t all have to agree. However, if the goal is simply to get yourself into Heaven then Justin’s beliefs are OK, but if the goal is to bring or show others along with you who may be different, then his beliefs are detrimental, that is all I am saying.

I don’t want to see anyone driven back from God by anyone. God is great and God is good, let us thank him for everything, and stop trying to make him conform to our limited understandings. He can and does do all.

I have not even began to discuss the many many things that are wrong about the theories on the age of the earth. If time permits I will address that later.

Love to all

Chris

Sonny,

I never said the Bible had to be totally literal. I believe when the Bible says something that is written in the form of literal history we should take it literally. When the Bible gives a proverb we should take it as a proverb as we would with any other proverb. A proverb is a general rule, not a steadfast unbreakable rule. When the Bible speaks with poetry we should allow poetic license just as we would with any other poetry. When the Bible speaks of Sisera falling in poetry as in the case that you cited I would allow that it may be speaking of falling as in “falling in battle”, not necessarily falling as in “from a standing position to a prone position”. When we say 3,000 people fell in the battle we do not mean that they were all standing when they were shot. Common usage of English is acceptable.

What do you mean, “seriously though…”

I looked it up. Allegory sounds right to me.

Poetry can usually be easily recognized. Parables were made obvious by Jesus. I don’t see any indication at all that any of Genesis is allegory. What is allegorical about listing genealogies? I asked in another post about when does allegory end and literal begin. I can see no differentiation.

I hear scientists say how old the world is. I hear theologians agree that the world is old. I believe mostly because they do not want to appear unscientific. I have heard them say that the Hebrew plainly indicates that God created in 6 24 hour days. But then they say that it must not be true because science says so.

I once thought that maybe the scientists and the Bible could both be right. After years of reading all I could find on the subject I am totally convinced that the Bible is right for multitudes of reasons.

If something appears to be literal, I think the burden of proof should be on trying to show that it is not literal. Why do you not take it as literal? I think if the scientific consensus was that the world was 6,000 years old most people would not have any problem with the literalness of Genesis. When you read the history of men trying to disprove the Bible by showing the earth is old it is a wake-up call. There are reams of scientific evidence that the earth is not as old as the current scientific consensus. A large project was recently completed to test diamonds for age. The diamonds were found to contain carbon 14 which is not detectable if over 100,000 years at best. Diamonds are claimed to be many millions of years old. There are many cases like this that show the current dating methods that appear to give an old age for the earth to be so bad off that they are useless.

I think if everyone had access to the information I have read it would convince them also.

“If something appears to be literal, ”

The problem is, it doesn’t appear to be literal. Just the opposite – it appears to be symbolic; fantasy; metaphor.

“I think if everyone had access to the information I have read it would convince them also.”

Once again, arrogance. Justin, many of us have read the data you are talking about and are not convinced. In fact, we are even more convinced of the opposite precisely because of the efforts of people like Ken Ham. The psedu-science that is employed by young earth theorists is highly suspect to me. You cannot start with your conclusion in hand and then build your case and call it science.

“Are you aware that there are marine fossils at the top of Mt. Everest?“

So, let me get this straight… According to the literal interpretation of the story of Noah, Mt Everest was covered with water for a couple of months. And you are suggesting that all of the marine fossil on Mt Everest come from that brief period of time?

Sonny: Fixed it. That will be $10.00.

Check is in the mail.

Heath,

I am trying to follow you here. In an earlier post you gave what you considered evidence to show that much of Genesis is allegory (or fantasy as you call it in one place). One of your points of evidence was that the Bible says that Mt. Everest was covered with water. What you called fantasy was, in fact, true history.

Then you wrote:
“So, let me get this straight… According to the literal interpretation of the story of Noah, Mt Everest was covered with water for a couple of months. And you are suggesting that all of the marine fossil on Mt Everest come from that brief period of time?”

Your point was that it is fantasy to believe that Mt. Everest was once covered with water. My point was that there is hard evidence that Mt. Everest was indeed covered with water at one time. The Bible was right, I was right to believe the Bible, and you were wrong to make the claim that the Bible was wrong when it said that Mt. Everest was once covered with water.

Sonny mentioned plate tectonics. I have read much young earth creationist literature that explain a possible mechanism and description of the world before the flood. The literature I read suggests that, before the flood, most mountains were not nearly as tall as they are now and that the oceans were not nearly as deep. When the fountains of the great deep were opened that was the main source of the waters that flooded the earth and that was the source of most of the rain. When the water moved from the inside of the earth to the outside the tremendous pressure pushed down the ocean basins and squeezed up the mountain ranges allowing the water to drain from the high ground. This scenario makes sense of the facts and matches the record in Genesis.

In a worldwide flood, creatures, seashells, and even hundreds of square miles of sediment could be redistributed overnight. It wouldn’t take a couple of months. And this is exactly the evidence we find in geology. The flood of Noah’s day explains the evidence we see in the geologic record.

I am not sure what your point was. I assume you agree with me now that it is not fantasy to believe that Mt. Everest could have once been underwater. Yes?

I would still like to know what you think about the other questions I raised concerning other places in the Bible that you consider to be fantasy. Probably most miracles seem to be fantasy if you want to look at it that way. Please don’t brush off the questions I asked in the previous post. How do you discern what really happened and what did not?

I believe the Bible does not have errors, you believe it does. I believe that when the Bible speaks in the style of literal history it is really literal history. You believe it is fantasy or allegory. You point out what you believe to be an error (or fantasy) in the Bible and when I show that the Bible was actually correct you go on to another subject.

Here are some of my questions again.

If a story seems to you to be fantasy is that an adequate reason to discard it as allegory or error as you do with Genesis?
I recall an axe head floating on the water. Seems like fantasy to me. Do you believe it happened? Water to wine? Feed thousands with a boy’s lunch? Raise the dead? Jesus raised from the dead? Dip seven times in the Jordan and be healed of leprosy? God wrote the 10 commandments on a rock. Need I go on? Do we relegate the whole Bible to fantasy, allegory and error? If not, how are we to discern which parts are truth and which parts are just a story, or allegory, or mistake?

Even if we disagree on Genesis 2:17, that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t have an explaination for it. Why did Adam not die on the day he sinned?

Heath you said “Why did Adam not die on the day he sinned”

My opinion is the death that God was talking about was a spiritual death. Adam was perfect union with God. His spirit was alive and when he sinned or disobeyed God that created the separation between God and Man. If he would have physically died on the day that he sinned then there would be no one alive today. If we died on the day that we sinned then we would have to be born dead. God’s spirit inside of Adam was what died; that is why there is a rebirth when we get saved. Our spirit is reborn and is now alive and can be in relation with God. I don’t think that God meant that Adam would never physically die but that his seperation from God would would die.

Heath,

Before I respond can you clarify something for me? Which facts do not matter? All facts, facts related only to this subject, or all facts related to the Bible? Or are there other criteria for which facts do not matter?

By the way, it is interesting that you get bored when I ask you to qualify your question.

Heath, you wrote:

“If there was a flood, I believe it was a local event. But it doesn’t matter to me if there even was a flood and an ark. I do not rest my faith in the historicity of the events but in the Truth that the story conveys. That is what you don’t seem to get about me. You keep wanting to argue facts. I don’t think the facts matter, especially since evidence (such as coral on Mt Everset) can be explained in plausible ways by both sides. I just look at the two sides and find one side much more compelling and credible.”

If there was a flood…. You say. So you believe the flood depicted in the Bible may not have happened at all. Interesting.

Heath, your comment here is very telling. One thing you haven’t called me yet is “naïve”. However, I will have to admit to it. I had no idea that you believed so many things written in the Bible as literal history did not happen. (Actually you first said you didn’t believe some of them, then you said you tended to believe it then you changed your mind again and decided you didn’t believe it.) But we are not to worry about that. We can change our minds at a whim since facts do not matter. I suppose when you “look at two sides and find one side more compelling” you might change you mind a lot.

Hebrews 11:7
By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

It doesn’t sound as if the writer of Hebrews thought the flood didn’t happen. But wait, you said you believed the original scriptures were what the writers “understood” about what God wanted them to say. I suppose the writer of Hebrews could have misunderstood.

You say you don’t think facts matter. That is incredible. Do you look before crossing the road? Or is it just facts relating to scripture? Scripture is our “roadmap” to God. And you don’t think facts about scripture are important?

Or, were you just talking about facts relating to this specific case? When am I to know when you think facts are allowed?

You seemed to really consider the facts important when I took one of your comments out of context even though the context was not relevant to the point I was making. You seem to be a little selective about which facts you consider important.

You say you are interested in my answer to a question yet you say you don’t consider facts important. What do you want? My feeling? This is on top of the “fact” that you believe the writer may have misunderstood God. You believe that even if he did understand God correctly that we only have copies of copies and it is probably not what he wrote anyway. And after all that, you think it is just allegory anyway. I don’t see the point in discussing any scripture with you. We need to be discussing more basic things. For anyone who truly wants an answer to that question the answer is available. For you, I still don’t see the point.

You say you don’t need facts but you want the Truth that is conveyed. Let’s just pick one example out of thousands. What truth is conveyed to you by the statement in the Bible that Adam lived to be 930 years old? Is there some metaphysical meaning to this? Seems to me to be a genealogy similar to many other genealogies in the Bible listing people’s names and ages and descendants. Yet you believe it to be allegorical. Upon what basis? I have asked before and you have not answered. I don’t expect an answer this time, either. I thought that surely there was some verse or something that gave you a clue. I asked honestly and I did not get an answer. I must assume you don’t have a reason other than you choose not to believe the Bible.

I am curious how you pick what to believe. You ridiculed the talking snake in Genesis but you didn’t mention Balaam’s ass. Is that allegory also? Samson and David both killed a lion with their bare hands. Is that allegory? You have not answered these kinds of questions in the past. Is it because you think it is allegory and you know if you answer it truthfully you will let many people know you don’t believe hardly any of the Bible? Do you think it is real? Then upon what basis do you decide one genealogy is allegory and another is historical fact? Upon what basis do you decide which “fantasy sounding” story is real and which is not? These are legitimate questions. How much of the Bible do you really believe? How much of the history written in the Bible as if it were literal history do you really believe?

Why do you choose to disbelieve the Bible about something like the flood? It is very plausible scientifically. There is a lot of evidence of global water catastrophe. There are many geologists who have studied the subject and are convinced that there actually was a global flood, based on the evidence. (Of course you do not care about evidence but some other people do.) But even if not supported scientifically why is your first choice “the Bible is wrong”?

You said: “You keep wanting to argue facts. I don’t think the facts matter…. “. By the way, I gave you a chance to clarify your meaning. I have no idea how you could clarify that but still, you had the chance. I heard a joke (allegory?) about someone not letting facts get in the way. I suppose it is allegory no more.

Related to your comment about facts not mattering, you mentioned marine fossils on top of Mount Everest again. Lest we forget the context, this issue came up because you ridiculed belief in the Bible’s story about the flood as being literal history. You called the Bibles depiction of the Mt. Everest being covered with water “fantasy”. I pointed out that there were marine fossils on the top of Mt. Everest. You say the evidence can be explained in plausible ways by both sides. That is not the point. The point is that you called it fantasy to think that a flood covered Mt. Everest just as the Bible said. The facts say differently. You were wrong. The Bible was right. The Bible gives no indication that it is an allegory or fantasy. It is written as a real historical event. It is referenced throughout the Bible as a real historical event. The burden of proof is on you to show why you think it is allegory and fantasy. In fact I have not even read of any bible scholars or Hebrew scholars who believe the flood story is allegory. I am sure there may be some but I have never heard it. I am confident that the vast majority of Bible scholars do not believe it is allegory or fantasy. Some believe it is local but I know of none who call the account of Noah’s flood fantasy as if it never happened globally or locally.

I will point out again that it is not a good thing to act as if you believed the Bible when you don’t. Remember my comment about you writing about Adam living 930 years to make your point when you did not even believe there was an Adam. That is very deceptive. That is the same thing as with your question about Genesis 2:17. You told Jesse you agreed with him. You don’t even think it happened. You don’t even think there was an Adam. Yet you answer Jesse as if you do believe it.

Allegory you say? Prove it. I have given you evidence from scriptures that the flood is not allegory. Where is your evidence to the contrary? Of course, according to you, any of the other scriptures could be allegory or fantasy also so they don’t mean anything. And of course there is that little problem that appealing to other scriptures would be trying to build a factual case and of course that doesn’t matter. Not to mention, the other scriptures were probably some misunderstanding or “copies of copies” anyway.

I am afraid I don’t trust your “just looking at two sides to see which is more compelling”.

I get the feeling (I hope I am wrong) that you feel you are free to pick and choose any and everything to be allegorical at your whim. I hope I am wrong.

You should stop teaching other people as if you believed the Bible. It is to your detriment. But those who listen to you will have to answer for themselves.

I believe the Bible is true. It can be ascertained by common rules of language what is literal and what is not. In most cases it is relatively easy. When the Bible says that all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered and even specifies the depth, that is literal. When the Bible says that someone lived a certain number of years, that is literal. When the Bible says “the Lord is my rock” that is not literal but is a metaphor. When the Bible says Sisera fell three times and died, it is a poem, a song, it is not literal and not meant to be taken as literal. This is not hard, people.

But, as I said before, there will always be the next question. Somewhere along the way we need to start believing the Bible as written and not be so quick to disbelieve or to just say it is allegory. The “allegory” road gets longer and longer and is unsustainable. There are hundreds of apparent contradictions in the Bible, some of which seem to be unexplainable, but after they are explained the “problem” disappears. The allegory road doesn’t end. Trust the Bible first.

OK, I did read part of your comment just now.

For the record, I did not say that Noah’s flood was fantasy. I said it “APPEARS to be symbolic; fantasy; metaphor.” This statement was made to contradict your proposal that it “APPEARS to be literal.” Neither of us know for sure… We can only have faith. But you like to spin instead of deal with what I say. Nuance, Justin, is a very important detail of any discussion.

Regarding Noah’s flood, I tend to think it is allegory. And I am not alone. It is a common belief within the church. But the important thing is that even if it is allegory, that does not negate the Truth of the passage summed up by the writer of Hebrews so well, that those who obey God are recipients of the righteousness that comes by faith. And isn’t that much more important than if there really was a flood and how big the flood was?

Now let me address one other comment you made, one which I believe you owe me an apology for. You said, “You should stop teaching other people as if you believed the Bible. It is to your detriment. But those who listen to you will have to answer for themselves.”

Justin, I have caught your tone of arrogance quite a few times in our discussions these past few weeks, but this comment takes the cake. It is utterly ridiculous. You have no standing to assess what I believe, nor do you reside on the throne of God from which you presume to judge me. I will stand or fall to my own master, and you are not Him. My faith in God and in His Son Jesus Christ is without question. I have devoted my life to service to Him and am ordained as an elder in His church, having the rights and responsibilities to preach His word. I have undertaken 7 years of in depth studies at college and seminary from some of the best scholars in the Church, submitted myself to the process of ordaination, and I have pastored various churches for over 12 years.

Who do you think you are to command a minister of the Gospel to be silent?

I know you think you are arguing from a position of righteousness, but you are not. You are accepting a branch of Christianity that breathes intolerance with every word it utters and shuts the door of grace to believers and seekers alike. I have a long list of people in my life who have been brought from death to life, from darkness to light, because of my witness and my life. Drug addicts, alcoholics, wayward fathers, and prodigal children are all in the Kingdom today because of my teaching of the Gospel. I will not be silent because He who calls me to proclaim His Word has my obedience.

So for you to take a position of authority over me and presume the right of judgment over me: shame on you. You have lost sight of the mission…

And you and I are now done discussing theology. There is nothing worthwhile or productive about our discussions if you are going to choose to pass judgment on me as a minister every time we disagree.

Sonny, sorry for the harshness of this post, but I felt I could not let his words stand without my response.

Heath,

Forgive me for missing the nuance. When I hear a pastor say that parts of the Bible appear to be fantasy the nuance is lost on me. The same point remains. Does it APPEAR to you that all miracles and other “fantasy sounding” occurrences in the Bible are allegory? I am curious how you pick what to believe. You ridiculed the talking snake in Genesis but you didn’t mention Balaam’s ass. Is that allegory also? Samson and David both killed a lion with their bare hands. Is that allegory? You have not answered these kinds of questions in the past. Is it because you think it is allegory and you know if you answer it truthfully you will let many people know you don’t believe hardly any of the Bible? Do you think it is real? Then upon what basis do you decide one genealogy appears to you to be allegory and another appears to you to be historical fact? Upon what basis do you decide which “fantasy sounding” story is real and which is not? These are legitimate questions. How much of the Bible do you really believe? How much of the history written in the Bible as if it were literal history do you really believe? Again, you did not answer. Again, you pick on a “nuance” and do not answer the meat of the question.

.

You wrote:

Regarding Noah’s flood, I tend to think it is allegory. And I am not alone. It is a common belief within the church.

I would like to see some evidence of how common it is. But I didn’t say anything about “common”. What I said was, “I am sure there may be some [who believe Noah’s flood to be allegory] but I have never heard it. I am confident that the vast majority of Bible scholars do not believe it is allegory or fantasy.” Are you disputing this?

And of course it matters if you can relegate anything in the Bible to be allegory at your whim without evidence offered.

The issue has never been the size of the flood. The issue is whether the Bible is truthful. If the writer of Hebrews did not know allegory from fact how do we trust them for issues relating to faith? Maybe they got that wrong also.

Is it really ridiculous to tell someone, “You should stop teaching other people as if you believed the Bible. It is to your detriment. But those who listen to you will have to answer for themselves.”

Instead of calling it ridiculous, why don’t you answer the charge? Do you say you are not teaching other people as if you believed the Bible? I gave an example of what I was talking about. You do not believe there was an Adam, yet you answered Jesse as if you did believe it. I did not ask an answer. I made a statement. I have asked before, why is my statement arrogant and yours “something else”. It is not arrogant to try to help someone. Maybe you will see the dead end road of assigning parts of the Bible to allegory. Probably not. But maybe others can see where it leads. And you still have not answered the question of where it stops. Does it appear to you that Jesus was raised from the dead or does it appear to be allegory? Does it even matter to you? We can still get a lesson from it, after all. Where do you draw the line once you start relegating things to allegory? You haven’t even answered the question and you call my statement ridiculous. I absolutely believe you should not be teaching such.

What do you mean I have no standing to assess what you believe? What standing is required to assess anyone’s belief? You told me some of what you believe. I told you what I thought of it. Then you called my tone arrogant. It sounds pretty straightforward to me. I don’t see what “standing” has to do with anything.

You believe I am wrong, I believe you are wrong. I do not recall claiming to reside on the throne of God. Maybe some more nuance I failed to pick up on.

I did not claim to be your master. I think you are protesting a little too much here.

I did not question your faith in God or in Jesus. I think I asked if you believed that Jesus was actually raised from the dead or if it appeared to you to be allegory. If I didn’t ask before, I am asking now. I think it is a legitimate question since your assignment of allegory seems to be tied in somehow to whether it looks as if it may be fantasy. People don’t get resurrected every day, you know. And I would still ask what criteria you use for thinking the resurrection of Jesus was a real historical event (literal). Assuming you do in fact believe the resurrection was literal. Then I would ask again what about other occurrences of apparent literal history. Do you have such a criteria or do you just look at it and see if you find it compelling, as you said earlier?

You wrote:

“Who do you think you are to command a minister of the Gospel to be silent?”

Speaking of nuance. Did you really get that from what I said?
You wrote:

“I know you think you are arguing from a position of righteousness, but you are not.”

This seems like a mixture of clairvoyance and judgmentalism. You don’t know what I think and I don’t recall commenting on the righteousness of your positions.

You wrote:

“You are accepting a branch of Christianity that breathes intolerance with every word it utters and shuts the door of grace to believers and seekers alike.”

That seems like a very intolerant attitude you have there. Do I detect more judgmentalism?

Your scholarship and ministry seem commendable. I suppose that a lot of people have been helped by the branch of Christianity that you seem to despise, also. It is irrelevant, however, regarding whether you should teach the truth and whether what you teach is the truth. Do you think people with more experience and ministry than you should teach error? That is irrelevant. What is relevant is “what you are teaching.”

Please explain what “position of authority” I have taken over you. Do you claim to be exempt from anyone stating their belief about your theological positions? Am I to be muzzled from saying you should not be teaching error? I am afraid you are protesting way too much.

I still believe you should not be teaching as if you believe portions of the Bible to be true when you do not in fact believe it. My question remains, forever to be unanswered I suppose, how much of the Bible do you believe to be true and how much do you believe to be allegory? And, in case you are inclined to answer, I am especially curious about whether you believe Jesus’ resurrection from the dead was literal. And, if so, why?

And, by the way, are you judging that it is wrong to judge? Would that mean that you are doing what you said was wrong?

Just a little something to ponder.

Have a good day!

Sonny,

I think you should not give Heath a pass on this. I asked some important questions that need to be answered.

Please re-read my quote. Heath pointed out that nuance is critical. And this is not even nuance.

What I wrote was:

“You should stop teaching other people as if you believed the Bible”. I pointed to a specific instance where Heath did just that.

You said I “seemed to suggest he should not be a teacher or preacher”. I suggested no such thing. Words mean things. I don’t always get them right and I try to correct them if I say them wrong. In this case I meant what I said. I specifically did not suggest that Heath should not be a preacher or teacher. You allowed Heath to express outrage and end the discussion instead of answering the question. I think you should tell Heath to just answer the question instead of reading into my statement something that isn’t there. (Of course, this is your website and you can do what you wish. But I wish you would consider it due to the important nature of the topic.)

If we can relegate the stories in the Bible to allegory, which ones are legitimate to call allegory and which are not? Must I call Heath to see what he thinks? Or does it not matter as Heath seems to think? Does Heath really think it doesn’t matter? Is it ok to relegate the entire Bible to the status of allegory? What about the resurrection? If our criteria for relegating biblical stories to allegory is the fantastical nature of the thing, the resurrection must surely be allegory. If not, why not? And if not is it the only one that cannot be allegory?

On Heath’s website he says that he believes that Genesis 2:17 is an example of God extending mercy instead of doing what he said he was going to do. In other words, God changed his mind. On this website Heath said he agreed with Jesse when Jesse said he believed God was talking about spiritual death. If God was talking about spiritual death as Jesse said then God did not change his mind. Did God change his mind or didn’t he. I suppose when you relegate stories in the Bible to allegory, you can make of it what you will even if your Truth is contradictory. Either God changed his mind or he didn’t. You can’t have it both ways. This kind of thinking leads to mass confusion.

Concerning your thoughts from the time you were an atheist, that is not relevant. We can’t judge which part of the Bible is real or allegory based on what we think an unsaved person will think. I think you said yourself that it took a miracle from God and discussion wouldn’t have mattered. I think it is the same for all of us. But after we are saved we should pursue the truth as we are doing here. You say fundamentalism is unattractive to the unbeliever. According to the Bible in 1 Corinthians 1:23 the Bible is not only unattractive but it is foolishness.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. We are no longer the natural man but we are spiritual. We should not arbitrarily decide the Bible is allegory with no evidence. We surely should not take into consideration what the natural man thinks about it since the Bible says he cannot know.

But if I were an unbeliever and depended on argument and not God and someone said here is a book you should live by. By the way, it is full of error and there is no way to tell if any particular story in it really happened or is just a “made up morality tale” I am afraid I wouldn’t be convinced.

Gotta run without proofreading. Cut me a little slack please.

Chris,

I think you missed my point. I believe that two contradictory things may not be both true. Something cannot be both “A” and “not A” in the same time and in the same sense. Do you agree?

As best I can tell, you think we should not call other people’s ideas wrong. You said: When you believe so much that you are the only person or group that can be right, then you are walking a dangerous path.

I don’t think you were comparing me to Hitler. I don’t have enough connections to take over the world anyway.

But, speaking of Hitler, I believe he was wrong. Do you?

I think there are many wrong ways to walk. The Bible says in Matthew 7:

13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Lest you say I am out of context, please note that the New Testament is full of rules about what is right and what is wrong. And what we should do and what we should not do. There are limits to how many ways you may walk a path and remain on the path.

I think we ought to try to find the correct path. Allowing that all paths may be correct seems to contradict this passage.

I would like to discuss the age of the earth but this thread is getting a little long. Maybe we can do it later.

I feel a little funny quoting scripture anymore. I didn’t realize that there were so many Bible scholars who thought the originals were wrong, the copies were wrong, the translations were wrong and we can at our own pleasure call them allegory and assign to the same scripture contradictory meaning. But that is just me.

Exactly my point. You keep quoting what is right. All I am saying is there can be more than one correct answer.

God did not put us here to just be stumps in the mud. We have free will, and we have the ability to do many things. Your narrow view puts God’s ability to test. There are no limits to God, and to be the sole purveyor of truth seems to go against what God has put forth.

I enjoy the conversation, but you treat this as a mission to tell people how wrong they are instead of the truth that they can believe the way they want and you can believe the way you want, and you are not both necessarily wrong or right.

The Bible is the guide, but we still have to take it a a living document. It’s meaning can and has changed over time.

You are right about one thing, however, the Bible is the most truthful document we have. But allegory and parable, and even time line discussions don’t change that. A story can be full of truth.
Therefore you are right when you say we should take the Bible as truth, but what everyone else is saying does not take away from that truth! They just have a different way of looking at it.

In the end it is God’s call – not yours or mine. That is all

This is long – be warned

Justin:

let us suppose for a moment that there is some sanity in this world, and maybe then you can listen to how you sound. I will address each point, as closely as I can, but since I do not seem to be the devout Christian that you supposedly are maybe I will still be “wrong”.

Quote 1: Do me a favor. It is not helping to talk over me. When I am right it is ok to acknowledge it. I won’t take it to mean you agree with everything I say. When you think I am wrong please explain why and don’t just make a blanket generalized statement and ignore what I said.

*This is an open forum, and no disrespect I will talk over under or through you as I see fit. You are not correct, because you are not open to the truth – Period end of story.

Quote 2: “I am afraid you lost me. Exactly what is your point? My last question was, “Do you see the logical fallacy in saying it is wrong to call other people wrong?” Actually, I think this is more of an incoherent statement than a logical fallacy. Maybe some philosopher out there can pin a label on it. If you believe it is wrong to call other people wrong, the only way to point it out is to break your own rule. That is a definition of incoherence. I find it hard to believe I had to explain this.

*Calling in you wrong is to prove how foolish you sound when you take everyone to task with no logic or real background. You actually use the Bible less than you think, and you quote people who you have read, or based on what I have read, etc. – without ever really justifying anything. The Bible says very little about the stuff that comes from you.

Quote 3: …And it is never acceptable to hold to two contradictory beliefs.

*For every example you used I could give you one back, but that would not convince you to see the facts.

*Let me ask you, do you believe that two people can be at the same level of faith in Christ, but have slightly different views on what a certain passage means? Or do you hold that the Bible is conflict?

*How about this: is it right to kill or murder? Exodus clearly states that it is not, but Leviticus gives the opening to put people to death. Which view is correct? Do you rationalize the text and truth here, or can there be only one correct answer. If killing is wrong how can we put anyone to death? Maybe just maybe there are levels of how to put someone to death. Maybe we can just kill them part of the way would that work? We could pretend to put them to death, to satisfy one, and maybe trick the other. Would that work for you?

*Or you just accept the fact that there are gray areas and levels to the Bible, and we have to use what we feel. Still from the Bible and still in Truth, but we have to use our human judgement here.

*How about Abortion and the Death Penalty? I am opposed to both, and feel that killing anyone is wrong according to the sixth commandment under any circumstance. If I believe this I will be going against a part of the Bible.

Quote 3: So, my view is not only wrong but narrow also. What happened to “there are two answers”?

*There you go assuming again. You and I would probably get along very well if we were to actually meet, but in this case you are wrong to call everyone else wrong. There is no logical fallacy in this. To reach truth we all have to seek, but to state what you believe is right or wrong the way you do it is insanity. Oh, and I am not discrediting everything you say, there are actually some truths hidden in there as well. Life still goes on whether you or I am correct. That is at least refreshing.

Quote 4: I believe God has the ability to inspire the prophets and apostles to write exactly what he wanted written in their own words.

*Yes and as God he can make those same words have a different impact each time you read or hear them, or have you never been inspired by the spirit? That is why some are called to preach, others to teach, and yet others to serve in their own way.

Quote 5: I believe God has the ability to supernaturally preserve his word as he promised.

*Yet again putting limits on God. He can do anything he wants. He is not breaking his promise by revealing different information to different people. He is allowing man to help spread his word, and not limit the audience.

Quote 6: So you believe God can indeed know the future even though it has not happened. That is a good start.

*I am not sure exactly what God knows, as I am simply human, but I believe it when God acts surprised or acts like he didn’t know something. I do differ a little with Sonny on this, as I can see how God knows more about anything than all living things put together and then some. That shows that I really just don’t know, and neither does anyone else in this or any other world.

Quote 7: I certainly hope I am not the sole purveyor of truth. As a matter of fact I depend on reading a lot of information written by people who are a lot more informed than I. But I also realize that a lot of people who know more than I do can be very deceitful. I try to be discerning because I know that for many questions there are wrong answers with eternal consequences.

* Have you ever heard be careful what you read? I choose not to believe everything I read especially if it is not from the Bible. However, God put us here with the inquisitiveness to explore and to seek answers. If we seek and never find, that is fine, but to just accept all without question goes against our nature. Since God made us, it goes against God’s nature as well.

Quote 8: Do you really believe it is a truth that you can believe the way you want? That would be news to the writers of the Bible and to Jesus.

*Wow you really are a little conceited, and possibly one of the most misguided individuals I have ever heard of. There were many writers of the Bible, and they did not all get the same message from the Bible. That does not discredit truth, that actually speaks to the greatness of God, that there can be many versions of the same truth, and still not be in conflict. You believing only one right one wrong would have you condemning (which is God’s job) everyone to hell who ever made a mistake, as of course there is only one right answer.

Quote 9: I am not sure how to respond. Can you give an example of a meaning you think has changed over time? Were some of the allegories actually literal at some time in the past? I am aware that there may be some customs that have changed but do not affect morality. What do you mean by “living document”? Do you think we are at liberty to change anything we wish?

*Who said anything about changing it? All I am pointing out is that the Bible is still going, God is still present, and neither you nor I can change that. Is revelations done? Are all the miracles done? Are we living in paradise yet? If you believe that the Bible is not living, then why continue to do anything but sit and wait for the end. God wants us in this world to make a difference. That is what I mean by “living” The words don’t change, but the impact for you or for me may be different at different times. You may hear a passage and think gee that is interesting, and I might have a life changing moment with that same passage. Alive, living, still in power, not a dead manuscript. Do I need to go on, or will your ego not allow you to take logic either?
You wrote:

Quote 10: It sounds as if you are saying that the Bible is not totally truthful. Not trying to put words in your mouth. Just trying to clarify.

* It just keeps going, tearing others down to build yourself up. No problem. The most of anything can mean all or just 50% plus 1. You can take it how you will, but I stand by it as the most truthful document ever written. That is to say there are other documents that hold truth, but not to the same degree as the Bible.

Quote 11: It sounds to me as if you are saying it is impossible to misinterpret the Bible and it is impossible to look at something the wrong way? That sounds a little far fetched.

*You wanted a response to everything, so here goes. This is more of the same from you. You misinterpret what I am saying, and then try to turn it around. This is all within reason. See example about putting others to death. There is a reasonable limit to how far you can go with strict interpretation, or free interpretation.

Quote 12: As with the issue of Hitler, I think, human nature being what it is, that the only way he could get to power is for a lot of people to have the opinion that it was wrong to judge him.

*Nope, just the opposite, it was he that was misleading the people, and telling them lies. The same way you try to convince others that your version is correct. That is what lead to what happened. The people were at fault sure for falling for it, but he was the guilty one who tricked the masses.

* I hope you do not misconstrue this as well. I am not calling you Hitler, but a strong example never hurt anyone. I truly believe that you are also searching, and I hope one day you find your truth. Until then let God into your heart and mind, and stop worrying about what author X or Y wrote about the meaning of the Bible. You interpret it the way God wants you to, and not some guy trying to make a buck selling you his book.

Quote 13: That is why I spend the time to help people think through the consequences of their beliefs.

Of course it is God’s call. When I stand before him I would like to hear him say he was pleased with me for trying to find out what he expected of me instead of him saying he was displeased because I didn’t care what was right or wrong.

*Amen and I completely agree with you on both of these. As we search for truth, God will reward those that truly served him, no matter the version of the Bible, or whether the earth was old or new.

I want you to know I do think you are great for being so devoted, and I hope you and I will be able to get along at some point, because as I stated before we would probably get along if we met.

Chris

To everyone else, I am so sorry this is as long as it is, but we seem to be writing short novels each time we address this topic.

All apologies Sonny

Justin keeps asking for point by point discussion, and I did what I could to appease him, by addressing each point.

I do not mean any of it to be offensive in any way, but I want other s to understand that bullying even in God’s name is still bullying.

He might be the greatest human to ever walk the planet, but he is not the only Christian, and therefore not the only one who can be correct.

However, I hope my tone does not offend anyone. Writing seems to take things in a direction you don’t intend sometimes.

So if I have offended anyone, or hurt their feelings I am truly sorry.

Justin – that is especially directed at you.

Love to all

Chris,

No offense taken.

Do you believe Hitler was wrong?

Do you believe I am wrong?

My point was that you spent all that time and effort to tell me it was wrong to say someone was wrong. That it could just be two different right answers. My point was that your position was untenable. In some situations both sides cannot be right. I have no problem with you believing I am wrong. I believe I am right. I don’t believe you are arrogant for believing you are right. I would like for you to see that sometimes there is a right and a wrong. It sounds as if we agree on that now. Now maybe we can discuss the merits of a case instead of discussing whether it is ok to say someone is wrong.

speaking of ending, I am planning to go to the creation blog since this one is getting so long if you agree.

Justin