Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by gb93433, Nov 20, 2005.
Some believe Genesis should be interpreted literally and others do not.
The Chicago Statement of Inerrancy
The Chicago Statement of Inerrancy </font>[/QUOTE]How does that answer the question on the poll?
We know without a doubt that the Scriptures are true.
We know without a doubt that the earth is round.
The rules of interpretation that we employ must fit with these facts.
The Bible says the earth is ROUND.......
40:22 - [In Context|Original Hebrew]
It is He who sits above the CIRCLE of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain R1474 And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
I'll just point out that a circle is two-dimensional, that is, flat.
I don't think Genesis gives enough information to infer the shape of the earth.
Liberal twisting of Gods word....of course it is literal. And it really doesn't matter what " YOU " think....it matters what Gods word says.
If you are thinking of the words " Four Corners "
that would be refering to direction more than circumference....NORTH...EAST....WEST....SOUTH.
[ November 20, 2005, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: Glory-to-God ]
that's a silly question in the poll.
In addition, the term 'literal interpretation' is an oxymoron.
It doesn't matter how I interpret Genesis; the earth is round.
In Genesis 1 there is no verse that says that the earth is a sphere. If you can get a spherical earth out of Genesis 1, you're using a liberal interpretation!
Where is the verse in Genesis ? I just found the one in Isaiah. Who knows there might be more.
It's not there, that's the idea.
The verse in Isaiah only supports an interpretation of the earth as a circular sheet. I don't think that should be interpreted literally either.
The poll is biased. I looked at it and didn't participate. There should have been a 3rd option: Genesis doesn't deal with the shape of the earth.
It does deal with sun, moon, variety of stars for signs, etc which imply rotation (and a flat earth "rotating" to have day and night is laughable).
A literal method of interpretation does not preclude the use of allegory in a limited illustrattive manner. It does preclude the use of allegory as a standard. Genesis is meant to be understood as saying what it means.
Oh boy, now we're trying to use this to prove that other verses can be allegory. What a stretch.
I am not sure I can answer this....my 2 yr old daughter ripped out the first few chapters of Genesis from my Bible this morning....maybe she was making a theological point
I'm not sure if I was understood. I am in no way accepting an allegorical method of interpretation.
Have you been reading the works of Marcion to her?