Christian Discussion Thread VIII: Augustine's Revenge.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

1 corinthians 1:24 =/=(necessarily) mean the Character Wisdom in Proverbs in 8/9 is Christ. The same way that Ephesians 5:25 doesn't mean that the Bride in Song of Solomon 4, is the Church. Maybe I'm being too pedantic here, but I'm not denying the parallels that can be drawn. We can certainly draw parallels and colloquial literary comparisons between the two pieces. But what I'm saying is, the character in Proverbs 9 is presented as a literary character, not an actual person, and most likely not Christ considering Wisdom is female in that chapter. It's poetry. Have you ever read a poem? Wisdom in the proverbs 9 is like lady justice. She's not a real being, it's an allegorical character we use to represent the concept of justice. If anything Paul is employing an idiom when he calls Christ God's wisdom.

You're comparing apples to oranges here. And this ultimately devolves into Literal vs figurative debate. What is the Holy Spirit conveying Propositional or Mimetic Truth. Did Noah really build an Ark? Or is it just a fable that conveys a pretty important truth: The wicked shall perish but those who have faith will be saved? Neither of the those possibilities undermines the validity of Scripture or falls outside the parameters you speak of, but one is supported by science, the other, not so much.



Kind of an ironic statement considering Peter got slapped down by Paul, a pharisee, at Antioch.

And you seem to have a poor remembrance of the Pharisee's true crime: Hypocrisy, not heresy. Remeber: do as they say not as they do?

I see the Wisdom spoken of here as what the Saints do. Because they cultivated their relationship with the Spirit. God reveals himself that way, see Matthew 11:25.

how convenient. You a self insulating argument. If someone disagrees with you, it's not because they've got valid arguments, it's because they're not sufficient in their faith. 'Mhmm. "All non-Orthodox teaching is heresy and it's heresy because it's not Orthodox" right?

Paul was edified mystically (prior to that, when he was a Pharisee, he was an enemy of God), and said knowledge puffeth and worldly wisdom is spiritual foolishness, and spiritual wisdom is worldly foolishness.

yeah that was really just me being a smart as.

Christ said to obey the Pharisees because they were the authorities, but he didn't just call them hypocrites, he also said they were liars and that their doctrine is wrong and is not from God and to beware it.

. He said they sat on the seat of Moses, which means not only did they have a authority, but served the role as prophet to the masses. And scripture also constests with you in that Christ actually had a high opinion of the Pharisees and counted them as being extremely righteous, , though shy of being truly righteous

[Gim]

Do you think Noah wasn't real, TS? It's one thing to say stylistic hyperbole might be used, but writing it all of as simply a fable is a bit bold. Was Abraham a fable too? What about Moses? I mean, parting the sea? Come on, it's 2017, surely we can't accept things like that.

Shallow waters, universality of the flood narrative.

The whole world wasn't even flooding when that occurred, so I concur.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Do you think Noah wasn't real, TS? It's one thing to say stylistic hyperbole might be used, but writing it all of as simply a fable is a bit bold. Was Abraham a fable too? What about Moses? I mean, parting the sea? Come on, it's 2017, surely we can't accept things like that.

I personally don't think it matters if he was real or not. And you're reaching here, doubting the historicity of one bible story, doesn't mean I don't believe in miracles, just miracles that are scientifically proved to have never have happened. I don't believe in Adam and Eve either, or really anything that happened prior to Abraham.

[Gim]

Do you think Noah wasn't real, TS? It's one thing to say stylistic hyperbole might be used, but writing it all of as simply a fable is a bit bold. Was Abraham a fable too? What about Moses? I mean, parting the sea? Come on, it's 2017, surely we can't accept things like that.

I personally don't think it matters if he was real or not. And you're reaching here, doubting the historicity of one bible story, doesn't mean I don't believe in miracles, just miracles that are scientifically proved to have never have happened. I don't believe in Adam and Eve either, or really anything that happened prior to Abraham.

You're saying what happened in Genesis are fictional stories? No chiding intended.

[Pasong Tirad]

I personally don't think it matters if he was real or not. And you're reaching here, doubting the historicity of one bible story, doesn't mean I don't believe in miracles, just miracles that are scientifically proved to have never have happened. I don't believe in Adam and Eve either, or really anything that happened prior to Abraham.

You're saying what happened in Genesis are fictional stories? No chiding intended.

Fiction =/= poetic narratives.

[Gim]

You're saying what happened in Genesis are fictional stories? No chiding intended.

Fiction =/= poetic narratives.

Psalms is more poetic.

[Pasong Tirad]

Fiction =/= poetic narratives.

Psalms is more poetic.

Job is probably one of the most poetic books in the Bible. If we're arguing, for example, whether or not the world is 10,000 years old, then that's problematic.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

I personally don't think it matters if he was real or not. And you're reaching here, doubting the historicity of one bible story, doesn't mean I don't believe in miracles, just miracles that are scientifically proved to have never have happened. I don't believe in Adam and Eve either, or really anything that happened prior to Abraham.

You're saying what happened in Genesis are fictional stories? No chiding intended.

Fables, myths, allegorical representations, call it what ever you want. They are vessels of mimetic truth, but I do not believe they litterally happened as described. None of them were even written prior to the Babylonian occupation, and were devoped during the Diaspora, a culture that already had creation narratives and flood myths. They're appropriated stories from Egypt and Babylon that they used to convey certain truths.


Does it really matter if God created the world in 7 days?

[Gim]

You're saying what happened in Genesis are fictional stories? No chiding intended.

Fables, myths, allegorical representations, call it what ever you want. They are vessels of mimetic truth, but I do not believe they litterally happened as described. None of them were even written prior to the Babylonian occupation, and were devoped during the Diaspora, a culture that already had creation narratives and flood myths. They're appropriated stories from Egypt and Babylon that they used to convey certain truths.


Does it really matter if God created the world in 7 days?

I find the "7 days" part figurative. It isn't necessarily seven days as in 24 times 7 hours. I believe, in some verse, Jesus talked about a day takes a thousand years. Perhaps, a few thousand years took to create the world in which we live right now.

[Pasong Tirad]

Fables, myths, allegorical representations, call it what ever you want. They are vessels of mimetic truth, but I do not believe they litterally happened as described. None of them were even written prior to the Babylonian occupation, and were devoped during the Diaspora, a culture that already had creation narratives and flood myths. They're appropriated stories from Egypt and Babylon that they used to convey certain truths.


Does it really matter if God created the world in 7 days?

I find the "7 days" part figurative. It isn't necessarily seven days as in 24 times 7 hours. I believe, in some verse, Jesus talked about a day takes a thousand years. Perhaps, a few thousand years took to create the world in which we live right now.

Again, I think TS is saying it's not that important whether it actually took 7 days or 7,000. Scientific evidence has proven that it took billions of years. We believe that God made the world, science has proven to us how.

[Gim]

I find the "7 days" part figurative. It isn't necessarily seven days as in 24 times 7 hours. I believe, in some verse, Jesus talked about a day takes a thousand years. Perhaps, a few thousand years took to create the world in which we live right now.

Again, I think TS is saying it's not that important whether it actually took 7 days or 7,000. Scientific evidence has proven that it took billions of years. We believe that God made the world, science has proven to us how.

Yeah, the link between science and God is pretty mysterious.

[Venerable Bede]

I see the Wisdom spoken of here as what the Saints do. Because they cultivated their relationship with the Spirit. God reveals himself that way, see Matthew 11:25.

how convenient. You a self insulating argument. If someone disagrees with you, it's not because they've got valid arguments, it's because they're not sufficient in their faith. 'Mhmm. "All non-Orthodox teaching is heresy and it's heresy because it's not Orthodox" right?

Paul was edified mystically (prior to that, when he was a Pharisee, he was an enemy of God), and said knowledge puffeth and worldly wisdom is spiritual foolishness, and spiritual wisdom is worldly foolishness.

yeah that was really just me being a smart as.

Christ said to obey the Pharisees because they were the authorities, but he didn't just call them hypocrites, he also said they were liars and that their doctrine is wrong and is not from God and to beware it.

. He said they sat on the seat of Moses, which means not only did they have a authority, but served the role as prophet to the masses. And scripture also constests with you in that Christ actually had a high opinion of the Pharisees and counted them as being extremely righteous, , though shy of being truly righteous

Christ called them murderers, the spawn of Satan and a brood of vipers. The Pharisees were as righteous as the Devil, for the Saints say Lucifer was perfect in all things save humility.

The fathers I reference are not just Orthodox, they are Catholic as well.

[Venerable Bede]

Do you think Noah wasn't real, TS? It's one thing to say stylistic hyperbole might be used, but writing it all of as simply a fable is a bit bold. Was Abraham a fable too? What about Moses? I mean, parting the sea? Come on, it's 2017, surely we can't accept things like that.

I personally don't think it matters if he was real or not. And you're reaching here, doubting the historicity of one bible story, doesn't mean I don't believe in miracles, just miracles that are scientifically proved to have never have happened. I don't believe in Adam and Eve either, or really anything that happened prior to Abraham.

So you don't believe in the fall?

[Gim]

I personally don't think it matters if he was real or not. And you're reaching here, doubting the historicity of one bible story, doesn't mean I don't believe in miracles, just miracles that are scientifically proved to have never have happened. I don't believe in Adam and Eve either, or really anything that happened prior to Abraham.

So you don't believe in the fall?

I think he's saying there is a fall, but the story of Adam and Eve is fictional, only hinting at how the fall occurred. The Original Sin was created through disobedience of God, or in another relative term.

[Venerable Bede]

You're saying what happened in Genesis are fictional stories? No chiding intended.

Fables, myths, allegorical representations, call it what ever you want. They are vessels of mimetic truth, but I do not believe they litterally happened as described. None of them were even written prior to the Babylonian occupation, and were devoped during the Diaspora, a culture that already had creation narratives and flood myths. They're appropriated stories from Egypt and Babylon that they used to convey certain truths.


Does it really matter if God created the world in 7 days?

I'm pretty sure Saint Basil the Great strongly condemned considering all that as purely allegorical. Stylized hyperbole is one thing, but pure allegory is foreign to the Church's understanding. Certain things are known from the start as simply allegorical, like the Song of Songs. Others were never considered such; Noah, Adam, Cain, these were understood universally to be real, historical figures. If you impose an interpretation which the fathers explicitly warned against here, where do you draw the line? You could do the same with the Gospels, "Oh they're just pagan stories retold to express certain truths. "

[Venerable Bede]

So you don't believe in the fall?

I think he's saying there is a fall, but the story of Adam and Eve is fictional, only hinting at how the fall occurred. The Original Sin was created through disobedience of God, or in another relative term.

Why would something like that have to be merely hinted at?

[The Conez Imperium]

Again, I think TS is saying it's not that important whether it actually took 7 days or 7,000. Scientific evidence has proven that it took billions of years. We believe that God made the world, science has proven to us how.

Yeah, the link between science and God is pretty mysterious.

I personally think the link is quite evident when one sits back and marvels at the beauty of the world. For me it began with how could music of such beauty exist in the world. I was obviously dissatisfied with the nothing answer.

[Pasong Tirad]

Again, I think TS is saying it's not that important whether it actually took 7 days or 7,000. Scientific evidence has proven that it took billions of years. We believe that God made the world, science has proven to us how.

Yeah, the link between science and God is pretty mysterious.

But it's really not. We shouldn't think of science and faith as complete opposites. They're complementary forces. Like science and art.

[Gim]

Yeah, the link between science and God is pretty mysterious.

I personally think the link is quite evident when one sits back and marvels at the beauty of the world. For me it began with how could music of such beauty exist in the world. I was obviously dissatisfied with the nothing answer.

Yeah, Isaac Neeton once made a model of the universe and thought: "How can this world be so in align? it looks as if someone created it."

[Venerable Bede]

Yeah, the link between science and God is pretty mysterious.

But it's really not. We shouldn't think of science and faith as complete opposites. They're complementary forces. Like science and art.

It's more like potatoes to mustaches.

[Gim]

But it's really not. We shouldn't think of science and faith as complete opposites. They're complementary forces. Like science and art.

It's more like potatoes to mustaches.

There is significantly more difference, for sure, as you stated.

[The Conez Imperium]

I personally think the link is quite evident when one sits back and marvels at the beauty of the world. For me it began with how could music of such beauty exist in the world. I was obviously dissatisfied with the nothing answer.

Yeah, Isaac Neeton once made a model of the universe and thought: "How can this world be so in align? it looks as if someone created it."

I seem to recall a famous scientist wrote in defense of Christianity basing it off the order and logic of his scientific discipline. His name however is lost to me.

[Gim]

Yeah, Isaac Neeton once made a model of the universe and thought: "How can this world be so in align? it looks as if someone created it."

I seem to recall a famous scientist wrote in defense of Christianity basing it off the order and logic of his scientific discipline. His name however is lost to me.

Yeah, I remember this Japanese physicist who underwent coma and saw God. He's now defending God and trying to prove, by the law of physics, His existence.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Fables, myths, allegorical representations, call it what ever you want. They are vessels of mimetic truth, but I do not believe they litterally happened as described. None of them were even written prior to the Babylonian occupation, and were devoped during the Diaspora, a culture that already had creation narratives and flood myths. They're appropriated stories from Egypt and Babylon that they used to convey certain truths.


Does it really matter if God created the world in 7 days?

I'm pretty sure Saint Basil the Great strongly condemned considering all that as purely allegorical. Stylized hyperbole is one thing, but pure allegory is foreign to the Church's understanding. Certain things are known from the start as simply allegorical, like the Song of Songs. Others were never considered such; Noah, Adam, Cain, these were understood universally to be real, historical figures. If you impose an interpretation which the fathers explicitly warned against here, where do you draw the line? You could do the same with the Gospels, "Oh they're just pagan stories retold to express certain truths. "

While I sympathize and partly agree with your viewpoint here, I think you're being a little hardline and the comparison doesn't really work. Christ's actual existence is of necessary importance to Christianity, and, moreover, has historical evidence backing it up. Whether Noah actually built an Ark is of secondary importance to the actual story. Moreover, while I think an Adam and Eve existed, and that there was a literal fall, whether Adam and Eve were singular human beings, or whether the fall was literally from eating a fruit, or that creation was really seven days, is also of secondary importance to the morals of these stories. Yes, I think it is wrong to argue that they were purely allegorical, but it would also be wrong to argue that they were purely real events. Like you said yourself, stylized hyperbole. Real events, told in a stylized and allegorical way.


The Gospels, though, as I said, are very different. They are quite obviously meant literally, as they are eyewitness testimony.

[Stonok]

I'm believer that Adam and Eve were real people who committed the original sin, just much longer ago than Christian Fundamentalists believe.

I see no reason why Noah couldn't have existed. I think it's plausible that the flood was a local event, rather have a global one. The word world would have been used in conjunction with the known world at the time.

Just my two cents though.