Replies

You think you know scripture, but you don't, because you do not avail yourself of history and the early fathers, who understood its cultural and historical context better than we do. If you did, you'd be Catholic.

Couple of problems with your assessment here...First, let's not confuse the Apostles with your early church fathers...It was your early church father, Origen, about 350 AD or so who convinced your religion that most of the bible wasn't real, it doesn't mean what it says...He apparently was suggesting the Apostles were playing word games with the scriptures...

And secondly, you are wrong about my knowledge of your religious fathers...I don't know it all but I know enough that your church has been caught corrupting the writings of some of your church fathers so that the authenticity of any one of them may be in question...

And thirdly and most importantly, the scriptures are just as valid now as they were when the Apostles wrote them...No one wandering the desert who may stumble across a bible has any need to know your church history, or any history or anyone's culture to have that bible come to life...

The Bible is a Spiritual book for Spiritual people...Absolutely no one needs your church father's bent on what they think the scriptures mean...

If you couldn't figure out the scriptures while you called yourself a Protestant, maybe you rejected what the Holy Spirit tried to show you...

Oh, and BTW,

And no, the 1000 years must not literally refer to a millenium, any more than the seven days in Genesis refers to a literal seven days, or the Psalm literally refers to 1000 hills

The fella in Psalms said 1000 hills...There is absolutely no reason in the world to suspect he didn't see a thousand hills in his mind when he said it...Maybe he was speaking in jest, but he saw a thousand hills...

1000 years and millennium are used interchangeably in the scriptures...1000 years means millennium...Millennium means 1000...

Did God say He created the earth in 7 days??? He sure did...Whatsa matter, too illogical for you??? Doesn't fit with your common sense???

God tells Peter that a day to Him is a thousand years to Peter...But that doesn't jive with your intellect, eh???

The mistake is not God's...it's your for not believing Him...

And that's for anyone looking over your shoulder...

My comments were not merely regarding the Early Fathers of the Church. It also applies to Jewish tradition and custom both in the Old Testament and at the time of Christ, including their use of ritual and symbolism. Much of this information is not directly available in scripture, and yet when understood, provides a context within which scripture can be read more accurately. Protestants are not usually opposed to using maps -- an outside source of information -- to better understand the events in the OT and NT. One must also avail themselves of other tools available to understand the place and culture of the times.

Secondly, you mention Origen, and the first thing you should notice is that no one in the Church refers to him as St. Origen. That's because he was declared a heretic. For example, he had some heretical views such as the preexistence of souls, universal salvation and a hierarchical concept of the Trinity, and these ideas caught on among a group of heretical followers of Origen, who were not as wedded to the Church's authority than even Origen himself. At Constantinople in 545, Origen's views were declared anathema.

There have been many heresies over the ages, and the Church has always prevailed in eradicating them. The sects of Protestantism are only merely the more recent ones, and the Church will prevail over these as well, including premillenialism.

The Early Fathers should never be read as if they are infallible. They were not protected, as is the Church, from error. They must be read in context, and with a critical eye. But when there is ambiguity in the way scripture should be understood, because it can be potentially interpreted in more than one way, the Fathers of the early Church, when they have a consensus on the matter, is a strong form of validation that is difficult to deny.

With regard to your comments on numbers. God may have created the universe in seven days, or not. The number need not be taken literally. I do not believe the seven days in Genesis should be taken literally. Seven is almost always a symbolic number in scripture.

God and reason are not in conflict. The more I have understood the sciences, and the physical universe, the more it has deepened my faith. The physical sciences leave a person who is open with no doubt that there is a Creator. There is no other, serious alternative explanation that makes sense. At the same time, it's clear that the aspects of the universe described in Genesis took longer than seven consecutive 24-hour days. "Seven" rather is a number that represents completion and wholeness, as "1000" merely means "many" or "a lot" in much Scripture.

And yes, that's based on reason and logic, our God-given gifts of discernment, as Petronski pointed out so clearly just earlier.