for something that is happening right now? maybe. for something that may or may not have happened thousands of years ago? not usually. the value of the story isn't in the writing, it's in the reading. this was the great insight of the ancient jewish sages - torah is a living document because the holders of torah are themselves living and ever-changing.
Well, that is what I was going to point out: I simply trust God that this situation was exactly as it says and of course you guys do not. (Of course, you guys don't believe in the text in the first place, but you know what I'm saying I think.) I could go on about that, but again I don't see the point...
Yes, this is always the problem with discussing the Bible. Often, there are a couple of ways of interpreting a passage of text (esp. with Hebrew where the vocabulary was so limited). I will, of course, choose the one that matches both science and what I know of God. You guys, and perhaps you'll disagree, tend to choose the one that supports your view of God. And, as always, we end at an impasse at this point. But in my opinion, it is expected: with both the supernatural and faith tossed out, agnosticisim becomes the only rational position.
The problem, stu, is that there are two possible interpretations of the text and you are completely ignoring mine as if it did not exist. Of course, you're entitled to your own opinion and yes I admit your interpretation is one possible interpretation. But the fact is that my interpretation is possible as well. I agree with Turok's post and approach - see above. If we keep going with this, we'll end up in a WWF match over ancient Hebrew which really isn't germaine to the the discussion anyway...
What a great debate!It is through questioning our faith that we strenghthen it.God does not want blind faith,He wants strong faith.
Shoe: >I simply trust God that this situation was >exactly as it says No Shoe, you do not trust it "exactly as it says". You have demonstrated this so clearly in your posts on this thread that I am amazed that you can now make that statement with a hint of seriousness. You trust it only by proclaiming some "onlys", "everys", "alls" and "wholes" as valid and others as invalid. Hardly "exactly as it says". JB
Can anyone explain this character who created the world, can do absolutely anything he wants, NEVER TALKS BACK?