The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

From your own church’s encyclopedia

That ain't "Official" when are you people going to get that thru you heads. SD

I covered for ya Dave, now you can move onto more important matters.

BigMack

[JohnnyM]

"Show me one place where it is literal. "

So Jesus was not tempted for a literal 40 days and 40 nights. Noah wasn't in the ark for a literal 40 days. Moses wasn't on Mt. Sanai for a literal 40 days. There is a difference between poetic language and literal accounts. I don't think anyone would think the gospels were poetic and flambouyant in language. They were literal accounts. I believe Christ will reign on earth as King for a literal 1000 years. It is a prophecy. How accurate is a prophecy if it uses figurative language? How can you tell it is accurate if the time is indeterminate? it's indeterminate than it could happen at anytime and cease to be a prophecy. Can you show me one prophecy where a period of time is used and that period is NOT literal. I have challenged NATE and vmatt on this and they coudln't answer, so I would like to know if you have one. If you can show me one, than I will give the benefit the doubt based on presedence(sp?).

JM

[ksen]

;^)

-ksen

[vmatt]

So unless you have some irrefutable evidence otherwise, Revelations was written about 90-95 AD.

Do you honestly suppose what you posted even deserves to be considered evidence of anything? Is your bar so low? Do you intend to subject your interpretation of inspired prophetic words of God to that low a requirement of proof? "Prove all things, hold fast that which is true."

[trad_anglican]

There is a difference between poetic language and literal accounts. I don't think anyone would think the gospels were poetic and flambouyant in language. They were literal accounts.

Do you also think that once you have forgiven a person 490 times, God no longer expects you to forgiven them?

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Do you honestly suppose what you posted even deserves to be considered evidence of anything? Is your bar so low? Do you intend to subject your interpretation of inspired prophetic words of God to that low a requirement of proof? "Prove all things, hold fast that which is true."

He just asked you if you had better proof to bring it on. We suppose you do since you base your entire theology on it. So bring it on.

[ksen]

Do you honestly suppose what you posted even deserves to be considered evidence of anything? Is your bar so low? Do you intend to subject your interpretation of inspired prophetic words of God to that low a requirement of proof? "Prove all things, hold fast that which is true."

You could have just said you didn't have any.

I am sorry that the testimony of John's contemporaries that he was around after 70AD is not good enough.

-ksen

[JohnnyM]

that is obviously figurative language. Christ was responding to an individual who asked Him if he should forgive someone over and over for the same infraction, and Christ's response was to show just how important it was to do that. It is fairly simple to tell figurative language from literal or prophetic language.

So I will include you in on the great search for figurative prophecy. Show me one prophecy where a period of time is used and it is NOT literal. Just one and will concede my argument and forever drop the issue.

JM

[SoothingDave]

That ain't "Official" when are you people going to get that thru you heads. SD

I covered for ya Dave, now you can move onto more important matters.

SD

[SoothingDave]

I meant to say thanks.

SD

[JohnnyM]

Is your viewpoint on this matter a Catholic one or a personal one? Just curious.

JM

[RobbyS]

Not all Christians had the same view of the Law as Paul. As for the divinity of Jesus, the doctrine of the incarnation was hardly something of which Jewish leaders would be aware. They would be alarmed by the contention that (1) Jesus was the messiah , (2) they had screwed up by having him put to death, and (3) he was still alive and was about to come again and bring their rule to an end.

[Havoc]

Looks like Havoc's been studying a new topc. I can't wait to hear his answers. Myself, I would say to the question "why doesn't the Catholic Churc have authority over Europe as a civil authority?" that Europe opted to overthrow the Church and go to hell in a handbasket.

LOL. Studying a new topic - naw. Just drawing out the possible spin on the topic. It seems ripe for abuse by you all. I mean, the rule of Europe was stolen, not elected or given. So, It leaves me incredibly curious as to how you all view and portray it.

[OLD REGGIE]

Reg, did you see TRD's #31,469?

Yes, I saw it. Feisty isn't it? I did reply to TRD though, to the extent that allend is not to be taken seriously.

[SoothingDave]

So Jesus was not tempted for a literal 40 days and 40 nights. Noah wasn't in the ark for a literal 40 days. Moses wasn't on Mt. Sanai for a literal 40 days.

And Noah wasn't on the Ark for a literal 40 days and 40 nights? (Just to finish your question)

My answer is: we don't know. I have said that the phrase is an idiom. I don't think we can say for sure if every time the Bible uses this idiom that it is to be taken literally.

There is a difference between poetic language and literal accounts.

Indeed.

I don't think anyone would think the gospels were poetic and flambouyant in language. They were literal accounts.

But if your language used an idiom to express a certain period of time, even when writing "literally" you would use the idiom. It was the way things were written. This is hard for us to understand, but a writer wouldn't say to himself, "instead of saying he was gone for 32 days, I'll just say 40 days and 40 nights." Rather, he would just naturally express the time in this fashion. It's not an affectation, or a style of writing, it represents how they thought.

I believe Christ will reign on earth as King for a literal 1000 years. It is a prophecy. How accurate is a prophecy if it uses figurative language?

Just as accurate as if it didn't. The problem is not in the use of figurative, idiomatic language, it is in forcing more meaning in to the language than it was meant to convey.

How can you tell it is accurate if the time is indeterminate? it's indeterminate than it could happen at anytime and cease to be a prophecy. Can you show me one prophecy where a period of time is used and that period is NOT literal. I have challenged NATE and vmatt on this and they coudln't answer, so I would like to know if you have one. If you can show me one, than I will give the benefit the doubt based on presedence(sp?).

A whole awfule lot of folks like to make things out of Daniel and the 40 (?) weeks that he prophesies about. None of them consider the weeks to be normal everyday 7 day time periods. They instead reflect different epochs or periods of years or whatever.

I guess since they don't reflect literal weeks the prophesy is not true, eh?

SD

[trad_anglican]

It is fairly simple to tell figurative language from literal or prophetic language.

Johnny M #31582

I don't think anyone would think the gospels were poetic and flambouyant in language. They were literal accounts.

Johnny M # 31588

that is obviously figurative language.

How does one tell “obviously figurative language” from “literal accounts?” You referred to the gospels as “literal accounts.” So they are literal accounts with figurative language?

And am I correct in understanding that “literal accounts” can contain “figurative language” but “prophetic language” is always literal?

[SoothingDave]

Is your viewpoint on this matter a Catholic one or a personal one? Just curious.

Personal mostly. I tend to avoid discussion of the book of Revelation and I do know that the Church officially teaches that the "rapture" and a literal "1000 year reign" are misguided. But mostly I'm just riffing off of that basic knowledge.

I'll be sure to check the official positions soon.

SD

[SoothingDave]

I mean, the rule of Europe was stolen, not elected or given. So, It leaves me incredibly curious as to how you all view and portray it.

Let's just say Catholics still ain't allowed to be Masons.

(Were you watching the History channel show about Elizabeth? Was that what sparked your outcry?)

SD

[OLD REGGIE]

From Rome'spoint of view, Constantinople starts out in 380 as the new boy in town and from that point on, steadily acquires power that owe more to politics than to tradition.

From OLD REGGIE'S point of view,the RCC branch of Christianity steadily acquired power and wealth from the time of Constantine owing more to politics and treachery than to Scripture.

[JohnnyM]

"And am I correct in understanding that “literal accounts” can contain “figurative language” but “prophetic language” is always literal?"

Kinda. I would say that Jesus literal said forgive them 70 times 7". Now Can I ask you what makes you think 40 days and 40 nights is figurative or that the 1000 year reign in Revelations is figurative. I will concede that some prophecy has figurative language in it. I don't think we will be seeing a dragon with 7 heads and 10 horns. But all prophecy where time periods are used are literal. There has never been a prophecy that says "x will happen in z years" and z did NOT occur at the prophecied time.

JM