Things To Know
- Thread starter WeberHome
- Start date
That slash is amazing
WeberHome
New member
Re: Things To Know
-
The Difference Between The Old Testament And The New
This major division in the Bible is primarily editorial; viz: it's man-made instead of God-made; but the division is pretty harmless and actually quite useful.
In a nutshell:
1• The simplest difference is chronological, i.e. the Old Testament focuses upon the Jews' religious history prior to Christ's birth, while the New focuses upon the world's introduction to Christianity in connection with Christ's crucifixion and resurrection.
2• "Old Testament" refers to the covenant that Yhvh's people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
3• "New Testament" refers to the covenant that Yhvh's people will eventually agree upon with God as per Jeremiah 31:31-34.
/
-
The Difference Between The Old Testament And The New
This major division in the Bible is primarily editorial; viz: it's man-made instead of God-made; but the division is pretty harmless and actually quite useful.
In a nutshell:
1• The simplest difference is chronological, i.e. the Old Testament focuses upon the Jews' religious history prior to Christ's birth, while the New focuses upon the world's introduction to Christianity in connection with Christ's crucifixion and resurrection.
2• "Old Testament" refers to the covenant that Yhvh's people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
3• "New Testament" refers to the covenant that Yhvh's people will eventually agree upon with God as per Jeremiah 31:31-34.
/
And not just the Jews, but also Israel's history.
And it's Israel who holds the birthright, not the godless Jews.
WeberHome
New member
Re: Things To Know
-
The Everlasting Gospel
This particular gospel is a bounce from the first chapter of Genesis.
● Rev 14:6-7 . . And I saw another angel flying through the sky, carrying the everlasting gospel to preach to the people who dwell on the earth-- to every nation, tribe, language, and people. Fear God! he shouted. Give glory to Him! For the time has come when He will sit as judge. Worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all the springs of water!
The everlasting gospel is very elementary. Pretty much all it says is:
1• There is a supreme being.
2• He deserves respect.
3• There's a frightful reckoning looming on the horizon, and
4• The cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --is the product of intelligent design.
/
-
The Everlasting Gospel
This particular gospel is a bounce from the first chapter of Genesis.
● Rev 14:6-7 . . And I saw another angel flying through the sky, carrying the everlasting gospel to preach to the people who dwell on the earth-- to every nation, tribe, language, and people. Fear God! he shouted. Give glory to Him! For the time has come when He will sit as judge. Worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all the springs of water!
The everlasting gospel is very elementary. Pretty much all it says is:
1• There is a supreme being.
2• He deserves respect.
3• There's a frightful reckoning looming on the horizon, and
4• The cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --is the product of intelligent design.
/
You'll find that the division between Old and New is Divinely appointed. 400 years between Malachi and John is a clue. The same number of years Israel was down in Egypt...
nikolai_42
Well-known member
I looked for it as well - haven't found any mention of it directly.
Is it possibly a part of one of his books? His 2 volume commentary on Hebrews or the book he co-authored entitled The New Testament Speaks? Or is the article titled differently? He supposedly contributed to Biblical History: A Chronicle of Faith Through the Ages, Volume 1 Number 2, August 1987.
I have it in a Bible I bought many years ago. It's logically placed between the Testaments.
More interesting is G-d is not just G-d of Israel but over the entire Earth and all the kings that were. Even Egypt for thousands of years! Babylon, Assyrie, all had kings. In the tenach, mainly psalms David wrote clearly G-d ordains the world, lowers and exalts whoever
The first civilizations and monarchies are directly related, going back 6000BC
Israel was different because they all witnessed miracles so G-d made a covenant. But i'm probably way to enthusiastic
nikolai_42
Well-known member
Was it a used bible in which a previous owner stuck the article in looseleaf or a bible to which Lane contributed?
:thumb: And this one:
"They fed him with grass like oxen and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till he knew that the Most High God rules in the kingdom of men, and appoints over it whomever He chooses." (Daniel 5:21)
You got it.
Ezekial live in action
22Therefore thus saith the L-rd G-D; Behold, I am against Pharaoh king of Egypt, and will break his arms, the strong, and that which was broken; and I will cause the sword to fall out of his hand. 23And I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations, and will disperse them through the countries. 24And I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and put my sword in his hand: but I will break Pharaoh's arms, and he shall groan before him with the groanings of a deadly wounded man.
He contributed. It's a King James Bible Red Lettered. I bought one on Amazon last year for a friend who comes for Bible study. I checked my Amazon account but they don't keep details of products bought.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Sounds more like this one:
https://www.amazon.com/Between-Testaments-Charles-F-Pfeiffer/dp/1584271043
A 136 page book typeset in small biblical fontface would easily fit in a bible translation. Lane worked on the 1971 NASB and could have adapted from Pfeiffer's little book.
AMR
WeberHome
New member
Re: Things To Know
-
Light
● Gen 1:3 . . Then God said "Let there be light" and there was light.
The creation of light was a very, very intricate process. First God had to create particulate matter, and along with those particles their specific properties, including mass. Then He had to invent the laws of nature to govern how matter behaves in combination with and/or in the presence of, other kinds of matter in order to generate electromagnetic radiation.
Light's properties are a bit curious. It exists as waves in a variety of lengths and frequencies, and also as theoretical particles called photons. And though light has no mass; it's influenced by gravity. Light is also quite invisible. For example: you can see the Sun when you look at it, and you can see the Moon when sunlight reflects from its surface. But none of the Sun's light is visible in the void between them and that's because light isn't matter; it's energy.
The same laws that make it possible for matter to generate electromagnetic radiation also make other conditions possible too; e.g. fire, wind, water, ice, soil, rain, life, centrifugal force, thermodynamics, fusion, dark energy, gravity, atoms, organic molecules, magnetism, color, radiation, refraction, reflection, high energy X-rays and gamma rays, temperature, pressure, force, inertia, sound, friction, and electricity; et al. So the creation of light was a pretty big deal; yet Genesis scarcely gives its origin passing mention.
● Gen 1:1-2 . .The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep
That statement reveals the planet's condition prior to the creation of light; and no mystery there because sans the natural laws that make light possible, the earth's particulate matter would never have coalesced into something coherent.
2Cor 4:6 verifies that light wasn't introduced into the cosmos from outside in order to dispel the darkness and brighten things up a bit; but rather, it radiated out of the cosmos from inside-- from itself --indicating that the cosmos was created to be self-illuminating by means of the various interactions of the matter that God made for it; including, but not limited to, the Higgs Boson.
It's curious to me that most people have no trouble readily conceding that everything else in the first chapter of Genesis is natural, e.g. the cosmos, the earth, water, sky, dry land, the Sun, the Moon, the stars, aqua life, winged life, terra life, flora life, and human life.
But when it comes to creation's light they choke; finding it impossible within themselves to believe that Genesis just might be consistent in its description of the creative process. I mean, if all those other things are natural, why wouldn't creation's light be natural too? In point of fact, without natural light, planet Earth would become a cold dead world right quick.
NOTE: 1Tim 6:16 mentions a light that no man has seen, nor can see.
Back in that day, the only light that people knew much about was visible light. We today know of several kinds of light invisible to the human eye: radio, infrared, ultraviolet, X-ray and gamma-ray. However, those are all natural forms of light. The light spoken on in 1Tim 6:16 is a supernatural kind of light for which humans have no means of detection thus far.
That light is further described by the Greek word aprositos (ap-ros'-ee-tos) which means: inaccessible. In contrast; all natural light is accessible in one way or another.
/
-
Light
● Gen 1:3 . . Then God said "Let there be light" and there was light.
The creation of light was a very, very intricate process. First God had to create particulate matter, and along with those particles their specific properties, including mass. Then He had to invent the laws of nature to govern how matter behaves in combination with and/or in the presence of, other kinds of matter in order to generate electromagnetic radiation.
Light's properties are a bit curious. It exists as waves in a variety of lengths and frequencies, and also as theoretical particles called photons. And though light has no mass; it's influenced by gravity. Light is also quite invisible. For example: you can see the Sun when you look at it, and you can see the Moon when sunlight reflects from its surface. But none of the Sun's light is visible in the void between them and that's because light isn't matter; it's energy.
The same laws that make it possible for matter to generate electromagnetic radiation also make other conditions possible too; e.g. fire, wind, water, ice, soil, rain, life, centrifugal force, thermodynamics, fusion, dark energy, gravity, atoms, organic molecules, magnetism, color, radiation, refraction, reflection, high energy X-rays and gamma rays, temperature, pressure, force, inertia, sound, friction, and electricity; et al. So the creation of light was a pretty big deal; yet Genesis scarcely gives its origin passing mention.
● Gen 1:1-2 . .The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep
That statement reveals the planet's condition prior to the creation of light; and no mystery there because sans the natural laws that make light possible, the earth's particulate matter would never have coalesced into something coherent.
2Cor 4:6 verifies that light wasn't introduced into the cosmos from outside in order to dispel the darkness and brighten things up a bit; but rather, it radiated out of the cosmos from inside-- from itself --indicating that the cosmos was created to be self-illuminating by means of the various interactions of the matter that God made for it; including, but not limited to, the Higgs Boson.
It's curious to me that most people have no trouble readily conceding that everything else in the first chapter of Genesis is natural, e.g. the cosmos, the earth, water, sky, dry land, the Sun, the Moon, the stars, aqua life, winged life, terra life, flora life, and human life.
But when it comes to creation's light they choke; finding it impossible within themselves to believe that Genesis just might be consistent in its description of the creative process. I mean, if all those other things are natural, why wouldn't creation's light be natural too? In point of fact, without natural light, planet Earth would become a cold dead world right quick.
NOTE: 1Tim 6:16 mentions a light that no man has seen, nor can see.
Back in that day, the only light that people knew much about was visible light. We today know of several kinds of light invisible to the human eye: radio, infrared, ultraviolet, X-ray and gamma-ray. However, those are all natural forms of light. The light spoken on in 1Tim 6:16 is a supernatural kind of light for which humans have no means of detection thus far.
That light is further described by the Greek word aprositos (ap-ros'-ee-tos) which means: inaccessible. In contrast; all natural light is accessible in one way or another.
/
What do you think He means when He says, "I form the light". Isaiah 45:7
PS It was spoken in the first person...of course.
WeberHome
New member
Re: Things To Know
-
The Length Of A Creation Day
● Gen 1:5b . . And there was evening and there was morning, a first Day.
According to Gen 1:24-31, God created humans and all land animals on the sixth day; which has to include dinosaurs because on no other day did God create land animals but the sixth.
Hard-core Bible thumpers insist the days of creation were 24-hour calendar days in length; but scientific dating methods have easily proven that dinosaurs preceded human life by several million years. So then, in my estimation, the days of creation should be taken to represent epochs of indeterminable length rather than 24-hour calendar days.
That's not an unreasonable estimation; for example:
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven." (Gen 2:4)
The Hebrew word for "day" in that verse is yowm (yome) which is the very same word for each of the six days of God's creation labors. Since yowm in Gen 2:4 refers to a period of time obviously much longer than a 24-hour calendar day; it justifies suggesting that each of the six days of creation were longer than 24 hours apiece too. In other words: yowm is ambiguous and not all that easy to interpret sometimes.
Another useful hint as to the length of the days of creation is located in the sixth chapter of Genesis where Noah is instructed to coat the interior and exterior of his ark with a substance the Bible calls "pitch". The Hebrew word is kopher (ko'-fer) which indicates a material called bitumen: a naturally occurring kind of asphalt formed from the remains of ancient, microscopic algae (diatoms) and other once-living things. In order for bitumen to be available in Noah's day, the organisms from whence it was formed had to have existed on the earth several thousands of years before him.
The discovery of fossilized sea lilies near the summit of Mt Everest proves that the Himalayan land mass has not always been mountainous; but at one time was the floor of an ancient sea bed. This is confirmed by the "yellow band" below Everest's summit consisting of limestone: a type of rock made from calcite sediments containing the skeletal remains of countless trillions of organisms who lived, not on dry land, but in an ocean. The tectonic forces that pushed the Himalayans up from below sea level to their current height work very slowly and require untold eons to accomplish their task.
So then, why can't Bible thumpers accept a six-epoch explanation? Because they're hung up on the expression "evening and morning"
The interesting thing is: there were no physical evenings and mornings till the fourth day when the Sun was created and brought on line. So I suggest that the expression "evening and morning" is simply a convenient way to indicate the simultaneous wrap of one epoch and the beginning of another.
Anyway; this "day" thing has been a chronic problem for just about everybody who takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of twenty-four hours apiece; so we end up stumped when trying to figure out how to cope with the estimated 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g. Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the mass extinction events.
It just never seems to occur to us that it might be okay in some cases to go ahead and think outside the box. When we do that-- when we allow ourselves to think outside the box --that's when we begin to really appreciate the contributions science has made towards providing modern men a window into the Earth's amazing past.
Galileo believed that science and religion are allies rather than enemies-- two different languages telling the same story. In other words: science and religion compliment each other-- science answers questions that religion doesn't answer, and religion answers questions that science cannot answer; viz: science and religion are not enemies; no, to the contrary, science and religion assist each other in their respective quests to get to the bottom of some of the cosmos' greatest mysteries.
/
-
The Length Of A Creation Day
● Gen 1:5b . . And there was evening and there was morning, a first Day.
According to Gen 1:24-31, God created humans and all land animals on the sixth day; which has to include dinosaurs because on no other day did God create land animals but the sixth.
Hard-core Bible thumpers insist the days of creation were 24-hour calendar days in length; but scientific dating methods have easily proven that dinosaurs preceded human life by several million years. So then, in my estimation, the days of creation should be taken to represent epochs of indeterminable length rather than 24-hour calendar days.
That's not an unreasonable estimation; for example:
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven." (Gen 2:4)
The Hebrew word for "day" in that verse is yowm (yome) which is the very same word for each of the six days of God's creation labors. Since yowm in Gen 2:4 refers to a period of time obviously much longer than a 24-hour calendar day; it justifies suggesting that each of the six days of creation were longer than 24 hours apiece too. In other words: yowm is ambiguous and not all that easy to interpret sometimes.
Another useful hint as to the length of the days of creation is located in the sixth chapter of Genesis where Noah is instructed to coat the interior and exterior of his ark with a substance the Bible calls "pitch". The Hebrew word is kopher (ko'-fer) which indicates a material called bitumen: a naturally occurring kind of asphalt formed from the remains of ancient, microscopic algae (diatoms) and other once-living things. In order for bitumen to be available in Noah's day, the organisms from whence it was formed had to have existed on the earth several thousands of years before him.
The discovery of fossilized sea lilies near the summit of Mt Everest proves that the Himalayan land mass has not always been mountainous; but at one time was the floor of an ancient sea bed. This is confirmed by the "yellow band" below Everest's summit consisting of limestone: a type of rock made from calcite sediments containing the skeletal remains of countless trillions of organisms who lived, not on dry land, but in an ocean. The tectonic forces that pushed the Himalayans up from below sea level to their current height work very slowly and require untold eons to accomplish their task.
So then, why can't Bible thumpers accept a six-epoch explanation? Because they're hung up on the expression "evening and morning"
The interesting thing is: there were no physical evenings and mornings till the fourth day when the Sun was created and brought on line. So I suggest that the expression "evening and morning" is simply a convenient way to indicate the simultaneous wrap of one epoch and the beginning of another.
Anyway; this "day" thing has been a chronic problem for just about everybody who takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of twenty-four hours apiece; so we end up stumped when trying to figure out how to cope with the estimated 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g. Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the mass extinction events.
It just never seems to occur to us that it might be okay in some cases to go ahead and think outside the box. When we do that-- when we allow ourselves to think outside the box --that's when we begin to really appreciate the contributions science has made towards providing modern men a window into the Earth's amazing past.
Galileo believed that science and religion are allies rather than enemies-- two different languages telling the same story. In other words: science and religion compliment each other-- science answers questions that religion doesn't answer, and religion answers questions that science cannot answer; viz: science and religion are not enemies; no, to the contrary, science and religion assist each other in their respective quests to get to the bottom of some of the cosmos' greatest mysteries.
/
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The believer need not assume the burden here. Scientific theories (not "facts" as you are asserting) are moving targets. To say that science must have the final word is to make an unscientific statement. Science is an open canon, therefore contradiction is to be expected. We expect no contradiction in Scripture because it is a closed canon. What Scripture says it has always said and will always say. Science is an open canon. Science has said things which it no longer says and what it says today may yet be changed.
The believer must allow the Bible to say what it says. Whatever one thinks about physics, astronomy, or any other science, he has no right to impose his unproven, ever advancing scientific explanations on Scripture and make it say something other than what Scripture says.
Some may ask, "So what is the epistemic limitation of scientific discovery?"
We should answer, that first, it is limited to natural phenomena. Secondly, it is bound to observable fact. Thirdly, is only ever descriptive, never explanatory. Fourthly, deals with probability. Fifthly, is always open to re-evaluation. With these limitations we can accept everything natural science teaches. The fact that what science says conflicts with the plain teaching of God's word does not require us to adopt a pseudo-science or to re-evaluate God's word in the light of it. Sarah's womb was dead and Sarah had a child in her old age. The two facts conflict with each other. Both are legitimately maintained in the belief that God calleth those things which be not as though they were (Romans 4:17).
Some serious hermeneutical hopscotch is needed to deny the literal meaning of days in Exodus 20:11.
The ordinance of the Sabbath is now doubtful if six days is not literal.
If the first Adam is allegorical, then the second Adam is, too?
A literal Adam is required in Romans.
The Apostle clearly described Adam as the first human sinner--not whatever millions of human-like beings in the presumed evolutionary chain.
Death came through Adamic sin, an explanation from Scripture that is cast aside in the notion of millions of years of death and destruction prior to Adam assumed by evolution.
AMR
Last edited:
Can i be a bother and bump in to quoute Psalms 90:4For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.