yukon254,
As long as people read the Word of God, we'll debate at times - hopefully with great love and grace - some of the text. This thread is an example of people, mostly believers I imagine, rolling up their sleeves, diving in and using our rational minds to discover the meaning of that which has divine authorship. The example you give is one such example, yet there are more.

Yet as we roll up our sleeves, the doctrine of the Bible in our faith is core to our faith. One of the five core doctrines and 2 core dogmas in fact.

My imagery for my sermon this past Sunday was a projectile I found while trapping. Similar to what trappers post here on this site. I mentioned that things that are "old" are enjoyed by some and not by others. In a way that's hard to define. Case in point.... is this projectile. A person really intrigued and thinking about it more deeply will ponder the people/person who made it, when they might have lived, wonder how it was found, how that native people lived back then and so on and so forth. The person not so much interested in it asks, "What's it worth?" See the various views? And both are ok. But they show how all of us made in the Image of God, think different. But the projectile is the projectile... no matter what I or anyone else thinks about it. It's real.
Same with the future. Some care. Some don't much. Many stress about it. Too many actually. And both camps would claim they are correct in their stance and we might say both views are in a way.... ok.

But the Bible has been inspired, authored, guided, guarded and handed down through the millennia to us today and THAT is a miracle that we shouldn't debate. Well we don't debate it if we're Christian. We do debate it if we're not.

The doctrinal statements regarding the Logos/the Word/the books = Bible; always includes language regarding the Inspiration and Inerrancy of Scripture being found in the original writings.

Here are examples of what's called "Statements of Faith."

From the Seminary I attended - from Dallas Theological Seminary's Board and Professors;
"We believe that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” by which we understand the whole Bible is inspired in the sense that holy men of God “were moved by the Holy Spirit” to write the very words of Scripture. We believe that this divine inspiration extends equally and fully to all parts of the writings—historical, poetical, doctrinal, and prophetical—as appeared in the original manuscripts. We believe that the whole Bible in the originals is therefore without error."

Here's what I wrote as part of my affirmation to the doctrine of the Bible and for ordination as a pastor in the Christian faith;
"The original form of the entire Bible, authored by human hands under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (Mark 12:26; 1 Cor 2:13) is without error, inerrant, in all it teaches (John 17:17) and promises (Ps 19:7-11). Every verse has assurance of God’s promises (Ps 119), and that Scripture never misleads in what it promises, affirms, instructs, or commands, being written for the good of those called according to His purpose (Rom 8:28)."

It's worthy and worshipful to read God's Word and seek meaning. And it's not arrogant to seek biblical clarity in the original languages.... it's deeper.
So we should do all of it In grace. As was given first to us. For no other reason than the very same God who inspired the authors to write His Story is still gathering His Church today.
Praise God.

Blessings!
Mark

Amen! Good morning Mark and Miss D!

Good morning Steve!
This early am time is a great time of our day.

Blessings,
Mark

I'm reading the book of Ezekiel presently as I work through reading the Lexham English Septuagint. In chapter 37 verse 25, God states that his servant David will be ruler of Israel for eternity. The KJV states the same. Is this verse suggesting King David will rule the new Israel in eternity or is it referring to Jesus who is in the family lineage of David?

Ezekiel 37:21-28 is known as 2nd Coming Imagery.
Which is Jesus.

It follows the pre-millinial imagery in Ezek 36:22-36

In the wondrous book of judgment and restoration written by the Levite prophet and priest 600 years before the Christ appeared.
Life in Babylon had to have been the worst hard times.

Blessings,
Mark

I wonder if the jewels we lay at the Bema Seat will determine our job duties in the New Heaven and Earth?

Mark, I absolutely agree with you. The bible IS the inspired, inerrant word of god. Once one learns about the evidence we have for the bible itself in terms of manuscripts that becomes clear. As an example scholars could write the bible word for word just using the writings of early church fathers alone; without using any of the ancient manuscripts. I also agree that Gods word was handed down through the mellennia.


However not all versions are the same. Countless churches and organizations use a doctrinal statement that will go something like " we believe the scriptures to be inerrant and inspired as they appeared in the ORIGINAL manuscripts." Thats where I have a bit of a problem. No one has ever seen the originals. So in the reading of Gen 3:16 that I used for example, which reading is correct ? The ESV or the KJV ? Obviously they cant both be right.


I believe the word of God was kept free of error through inspiration down through the ages.

Anyone who has studied it will see there are some major differences between some of our english translations. That, I believe, is where fallible man comes in.

John Macarthur is in my opinion one of the greatest pastors of our time. I've probably watched or listened to every sermon he has online and own and have read most of his books. I believe he is a true man of god, but I do disagree with him on the subject of textual criticism. I have no problem using the modern versions, but whenever i come to something I dont quite understand I go to a majority text version.

A friend of ours is a missionary and has planted a church in a small village near us so we stopped in a week or so back to attend one of his services. He was preaching a sermon in Gen. and asked a few different people to read certain verses. It was almost impossible to follow because it seemed everyone had a different version. He finally asked someone what version they were using because even he was confused.

Rom 14: 3-5 ( Let not him that eateth despise him thet eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Vs 4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant?to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. Vs5 one man esteemeth one day obove another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Just read through this the other day. Seek, and ye shall find.

1 Corinthians 14: 26 (How is it then , brethren ? When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revolation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
Vs 27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

When a church has a congregation using multiple versions of the Bible, it's like strange tongues.

Vs 33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Excellent points. I guess I never thought of it like that before.

Great conversation y'all (English does have 2nd person plural, but only in Texan dialects). I want to riff on the above subthread, because I find it fascinating and informative, and because translational/interpretive traditions have made it difficult for us to grasp its significance. When all y'all (I ain't from Texas, but I'm trying) read Genesis 1-11, keep in mind that it acts as the literary introduction to Genesis, the Torah, and the entire Bible. It introduces to the reader all of the important players, conflicts, and themes. Almost any concept found in the Bible can be traced back and linked to ideas first presented in Gen 1-11 (often in Gen 1-3). With that in mind, I think it behooves us to do some hard work in reading and interpreting these passages. Sometimes that involves doing some homework on language, history, and culture, and it often involves reading or hearing viewpoints that are different from our own. This thread appears to be working toward that goal. Keep it up!

With that said, I want to do a little brief exegetical work on the curses of Gen 3. To do that, we need, of course, to think about Gen 1-2. Both chapters are creation narratives that set up the human story for immense potential. I don't know that I'd say they show a state of perfection, but they do lay out a sort of ideal course for the story of humanity to move along. Potential rather than perfection. The first part of Genesis 3 shows how humanity put itself on the wrong course, and we now live in a world of unrealized potential, headed in the wrong direction. The "curses" are essentially God telling the humans what the consequences of their rebellion will be, a rundown of what the path that they've chosen will look like (note that God curses the Serpent and says the ground is cursed because of man. He does not curse man or woman - a common misconception even though the truth is in plain sight). The rest of the Bible (and history for that matter) is the story of God's work with humanity to get things back on the right course and humanity's inability or unwillingness to work with God to do that.

The first set of consequences (3:14-15) set up a conflict between the "seed of the woman" and the "seed of the Serpent". There is, of course, the promise that a specific descendant of the woman (i.e. a human) will defeat the Serpent itself, which we find fulfilled in Jesus. More broadly in the narrative before Jesus, we see two kinds of people - those that align themselves with humanity's calling to be the Image of God (true humans) and those that align themselves with the purposes of the Serpent. When we read Genesis, we can watch many seeds of the woman have opportunity to become snake-crushers, but they most often are deceived like Eve or become deceivers like the Serpent. This is the driving plot conflict of the Bible. When will we see a truly human one? One that will rule over the beasts rather than becoming one? Sarah tempts Abram with Hagar, Abram deceives Pharaoh with Sarah, Isaac deceives Abimelech, Jacob (whose name means heel-grabber) deceives Esau, Isaac, and Laban. The list goes on, but what we have are a bunch of "seeds of the woman" acting like "seeds of the snake". Deceiving and being deceived.

The next set of consequences falls on the woman (3:16). This one is, I think, severely misunderstood. Mark is right, pain is the wrong translation. Grief or sorrow is more correct. Do a concordance search; it's obvious. The root word is "atsab", and it is also used to describe how God feels about the state of the world before the flood. The next two translation problems have to do with childbirth. My NASB says, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. In pain will you deliver children." However, the first "childbirth" in Hebrew actually denotes conception not birth, and the second "deliver children" is a broad term that can include the whole process of raising children. Interestingly enough, the word uses the same three letters as the word "child", so it's like making the word "child" a verb. In the Bible you child children, or the act of raising children would be childing. My point is that there are other Hebrew words used to talk about the pain of childbirth (e.g. "chuwl"), but they are not used here. My own (rough) translation might read, "I will greatly multiply your sorrow in conception. In grief will you bear children." In the culture of the day, the work that any woman hoped to accomplish in life had everything to do with being a wife and mother - bearing children to continue the family line. This consequence deals directly with her primary role. She will only be able to do her life's work in grief and sorrow. Read the rest of Genesis and watch it play out. Is infertility a problem for the women of Genesis? How about strife, conflict, and scheming in order to produce offspring, the most offspring, the favored offspring? To be the favored wife? The next line is, "Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you". The translation there is fine, but we need to think about it in the context of the narrative. The first time that sin is mentioned in the Bible is Gen 4:7, where this same line describes Cain's relationship to sin. Sin is like a crouching animal, desiring Cain, but Cain must rule it. Also, remember in Genesis 1 that man and woman together are the image of God, and their role together was to rule over the animals on the dry land. Now, rather than ruling Creation together as the image of God, the relationship of husband and wife is defined by animalistic (or sinful?) longing/desire and man ruling over the woman like an animal. This is far from the ideal God set up for them in Genesis 1 and 2. Again, read the rest of Genesis (or the Bible) with that in mind.

The final section is for Adam. The "toil" or "hard labor" in verse 17 is once again from the root word "atsab" meaning grief or sorrow, just like in verse 16. And again, this deals primarily with what a man's role would have been in that culture - providing for the family. Back in Eden, God gave the humans access and permission to eat freely of the fruit, but out here the man will sweat away his days in sorrow only to produce thorns and thistles. In Eden the humans also, evidently, had access to the Tree of Life. Out here, it's death and dust in the end. Again, think about how the rest of the story goes. Any famines in the story? How about death? Fear of death and scheming to avoid it?

If I were to summarize the main point, I would suggest that God's initial intention for humanity, beginning in Eden, was unity or harmony. This is essentially what the word righteousness means - right relationships. Humanity in peaceful union with God, each other, and Creation. Now that humanity has rebelled, all of those relationships are broken. God and man have been separated. Humans are now at odds with each other. Even humanity's relationship with the rest of Creation is broken. God created the world for increasing life and blessing, but because of the rebellion of God's representatives on the earth, what we experience now is death and curse. The calling that God gave to humans is still there. Our desire to experience life and blessing is still there, but now the ways in which we try to obtain life and blessing for ourselves just expands and propagates the death and curse that we've unleashed. If only there were someone, some seed of the woman, a truly righteous human, a new Adam of sorts, that could restore life and blessing, undo the curse, defeat death, and bring humanity back into the unions it was made for...

Good post jht
Genesis is definitely the keystone book. Ch 2: vs 4-5 seem to be a crescendo of ch 1:11
There seldom a study especially word Study that does not send me back to Genesis.
Thanks for the very informative share.

Excellent post jht. You've dwelled further into it with more insight and it has me thinking. I've read the Bible through and through several times; particularly the OT, but I admit that I do fall short on the NT, other than the red letters in the Bible. Too many discrepancies in the NT I can't explain other than the Words of Jesus Christ which make sense to me, and also bring life to the OT.

For me, regarding the NT, I only concern myself with the Gospels, and the letters of Jesus' disciples and His brothers that walked with him and what they say. I take the rest with a grain of salt; as I am not convinced that ALL of the NT was inspired by God such as the Torah written by Moses. That's just me, and many have called me a blasphemer because of it; but I can live with it.

I love the Book of Job, but Genesis is my favorite and amazing, IMO it gives the entire narrative. I think every single page within the Book of Genesis points and screams out to Jesus Christ.

With that said, since we are discussing the 'sons of God'...

In Matthew 24:36, Jesus says "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heavens, nor the Son of Man, but My Father only. But, as in the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be."

So what was going on in the days of Noah? Of course wickedness and sin were rampant as they are now, but I think Jesus is pointing us in a direction here that is more than just sinfulness; but rather total corruption of God's genetic line. I think the fallen angels did exactly what the Book of Enoch says they did and corrupted God's genetic line He had created.

Why would God kill every single living creature on the planet (other than the ones in the ark), if mankind's sin was the only culprit? Even in Sodom and Gomorrah, God wrecked everything, even the creeping things and the plants that grew on the ground. Why kill the plants and animals as a food supply if all the people were destroyed? Could it be that all living creatures had been corrupted genetically someway? When the two Angels God sent to rescue Lot got to his house, the wicked (and I think genetically screwed up) men of Sodom and Gomorrah tried to rape them. They wanted those angels to rape even more than Lot's daughters.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that God was dealing with bad DNA that had been corrupted by the mischief caused by the fallen angels. That is why He instructed Joshua to kill every man, woman, and child in the land of Canaan. How many times does the Bible in Genesis repeat that Ham is the father of Canaan? It repeats it enough that I take notice and also do some research on Ham.

God did it to protect His children; like a loving father would most certainly do.

I think we are headed that way today very fast in regard to genetic and DNA manipulation via CRISPR and who knows what else is going to come down the pike. I think we are already there. I am only 44 years old, but I think I'm going to live to see Giants walk the face of the earth again. Amazing and fascinating times we live in!

What I enjoy is what is being done here on this thread. Spirit-led discussion of God's Word. And brother Chancey, be careful, at your tender age I had no desire to study Scripture or minister to people any more than I was when I was in my 40's...

but God's providence is always at work and you sir may well find your heart pricked yet again as you turn 50, or 60, or 70 and before you know it, you're in Dallas, or somewhere similar. .
That's how God works we find out. One day your heart tells you, "Follow Him." Even more.

Two important writings I keep front and center in all of it because our faith has a rich and worthy history as old as man himself....

One is from the NT;
Jude 3, in 67-70 AD
“Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.”

And one is from a churchman St. Vincent of Lérins, in 434 AD
“Now in the catholic (universal) church itself we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all; that is truly and properly catholic.”


The Orthodox (correct-thinking) of Christianity is ages old.
So as we worship, are we faithful to what has been handed down to us as saints (believers) and which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all and which is truly universal in God's church (His Children)?

I remember every day that Satan's plan is division. It's everywhere.... because the enemy's plan appeals to the flesh and to the world.

All good to pray about. And stand against with your divine armor because we stand no chance otherwise.
How do we know? God's Special Revelation we call Scripture and God calls His Word for us Children.

Blessings!
Mark

For those who enjoy and read the writings of the Church Fathers, who persevered against the Gnostics and all manner of human and devilish heresy in the centuries following rampant persecution in the Roman Empire.... I'm reading this book and I very highly recommend it.

Athanasius was a profound seeker of the meaning of Scripture and defender of the faith against heretics of his day.
Praise God.



Blessings,
Mark

So no Pauline epistles? Interesting.

Many of Paul's writings are too difficult for me to understand clearly. I have a hard time with some of them.

The Gospels and Jesus' teachings are much more clear and direct; at least for me.

Chancey your thoughts on the writings in the NT by the apostles who walked with Jesus?

I like their brevity. I look at them like a first hand account written by the folks within Jesus' inner circle that knew Him. Seem to follow along with Jesus' Gospel teachings well.

John certainly reads as a first hand account.