Do you believe?

[SierraLea]

I'm in a class that studies the Old Testament at my college right now, and the teacher doesn't believe that there was a burning bush, a parting of the red sea, or a world-wide flood.
I believe in all those things and more. What do you believe?

[K. Ayato]

I believe they happened. I also believe some events that took place during Old Testament times that are recorded in the Bible are hard to grasp, let alone explain to others in a way that makes sense. That doesn't automatically mean they never happened. God chose to have things recorded in what we know as the Bible for a reason, and if we still can't quite figure out why, that's perfectly okay.

[Atria35]

Some of them, possibly. Definitely not all of them. The thing is, most of the Old Testament was told via oral tradition for hundreds of years. If anyone knows anything about oral tradition, then the one thing that is constant is while the main story might stay the same, but the details differ from telling to telling, and from audience to audience. That burning bush might have been a burning woodpile to a different denomination of Judaism. But those details and differences are lost once something is written down and codified, and no way of knowing which version is true or not.

[Rusty Claymore]

Atria, in regards to oral tradition what you say is correct in regards to stories, such as the [s]Ninety Nine Nights[/s](1001 Arabian Nights - thanks, K.) and others. However, in regards to the oracles of God, they were as meticulous in the tellings as they were in their writings. So I think there is less deviation than there normally would be. Also, as far as I can remember, most of the Old Testament is written by first hand accounts. I may be wrong here though, I've never ran a comparison before.

The times that Jesus quotes the Old Testament as fact, and what He has to say about it, are my main reasons for believing in its... historicity? Er, its being true. (がお、がお, big words...)

[Atria35]

^ Since I can't respond without it falling into debate territory, I will have to leave it there Ah, well! I have stated what I think and I'm sticking to it.

[ChristianKitsune]

Let's continue to keep this nice and civil guys. ^_^/

As for me, I believe they did happen but I haven't really considered the fact that maybe they didn't... O.o

[Zeldafan2]

Responded to Atira's post through PM instead.

[PatchOfSerenity]

I believe they did.

[Atria35]

Stuff

Zeldafan, this is debate territory, and that's not allowed on this forum. Please PM me if you'd like to respond to my post.

[Zeldafan2]

Zeldafan, this is debate territory, and that's not allowed on this forum. Please PM me if you'd like to respond to my post.

You're right. I'll edit my previous post, and re-respond to you through PM.

[Peanut]

I'll make a list for time reasons:
-There was no parting of the Red Sea, this is a fact that even conservative scholars agree with so I guess it doesn't really count as a belief then since believing otherwise just means your wrong but meh, I'll list it
-Genesis is really not about the flood or its creation account so who cares if they are 100% accurate accounts of history or not. There's more important things to argue
-Many of the authors of the books of the Old Testament (like Daniel) are probably not the authors we think they are
-JEDP is a terrible theory that needs to go die. Multiple (possibly more or less then 4) traditions is a better way to explain the development of the first 5 books of the Bible though guessing the exact number of traditions that contributes brings me to the reason I think JEDP should go die so best to leave that ambigious
-Kings and Chronicles are not history textbooks
-Joshua is one of the most frustrating books to talk historicity about
-Westerners need to start enjoying the stories and not getting hung up on the details of them
-Enoch died.

That's all I have time for.

[PatchOfSerenity]

I believe that the old testament is true. They have found chariot wheels and bones of men and horses in the red sea. And I go to answers in genesis alot and they have proof and records in multiple areas of the great flood. The burning bush well I have no idea how you would prove that since that bush would be long gone by now, but I believe it happend and also Jesus spoke of Enoch quite a few times. Paul said that every part of the Bible is what God commanded to be written. I believe it all happened. Some things might not make much sense to us and I also remimber reading in scripture somewhere that God made the Bible to confuse the wise and teach the meek.

[Xeno]

Also siding with Atria and Peanut here. Archaeological and anthropological studies are continuously finding that stories from the Bible as a whole either didn't happen or couldn't have happened. Not to mention that large portions of the Bible is poetry and not supposed to be historical record. There are three different creation stories in the Bible for crying out loud (Gen 1:1-Gen 2:4a, Gen 2:4b-Gen 2:15, and a fragmented story in Job and Psalms).

[PatchOfSerenity]

So why did they tell us these stories? What do you believe really happened? Which parts are true? Why would God allow this in his Bible if not true? I'm just sincerly asking.

[Xeno]

So why did they tell us these stories? What do you believe really happened? Which parts are true? Why would God allow this in his Bible if not true? I'm just sincerly asking.

This is not a respond back and forth part of the forum, it is a respond and move on area. If you have questions about a post someone makes then send them a PM, do not make additional posts in the thread trying to argue a point.

Rule #2: State your position, and move along.
This forum is for Q&A regarding Christian growth and spiritual formation - not for theology discussion or debate. One you've stated your position on a topic, please refrain from pointing out how wrong the person above you is. Back-and-forth nitpicking, sniping and debating never really accomplishes anything - and you end up looking silly. Unless you're being asked to clarify something, we request that you not "dig in" and defend your point of view. If you really feel like you need to warn the OP about harmful advice or correct some subsequent post in the thread, send a PM.

[PatchOfSerenity]

Sorry I'm new I aint quite used to the rules.

[Davidizer13]

So why did they tell us these stories? What do you believe really happened? Which parts are true? Why would God allow this in his Bible if not true? I'm just sincerly asking.

Jesus told stories that were definitely fictional to emphasize or illuminate truths, so why couldn't God do the same through stepping aside and letting his people tell their side of the story? I doubt there was really a prodigal son or a good Samaritan, but even so, the points Jesus was trying to make still hold up; truth will hold up regardless of how it's presented, be it God speaking directly, through a prophet, or through a story.

I believe most of the Bible reflects actual events, but woven throughout are bits and pieces from the writers' own traditions that were left in because they say good things. For the most part, I hold pretty close to the things Peanut pointed out, but I also hold to believing that Job is allegorical, pushed together from a couple different writers at different times, just based on how the story flows (Elihu seems to be a later addition, for one) and how some parts of it don't look like they fit with the rest of the Bible. But in the end, I believe God's truth wins out in it, and it makes excellent points about God along the way.

[Nate]

I believe that a good portion of Genesis at least is mythology, not meant to be taken as literally having happened but are meant more as "Just So Stories" or parables. The purpose of Genesis isn't to give an accurate history of the world, so I see no problem in believing most of the things portrayed in it did not actually happen.

Multiple (possibly more or less then 4) traditions is a better way to explain the development of the first 5 books of the Bible

Right, there's definitely spots in the Bible where you can tell that multiple versions of a story were kind of put together in a "best fit" way, especially the story of the flood, but it's pretty silly to assign an exact number to it.

[armeck]

I think they happened. but like, the way the perceved then and the way we precieve them ia different. so its not that they didn't happen. but some of them probably didn't happen they way the seem yo be written

[seaglass27]

I think the miracles are literal. However, it wouldn't affect my faith if it were proved to me that, say, evolution were true. I think the creation account leaves a lot of room for allegory potential.

[SierraLea]

I think the miracles are literal. However, it wouldn't affect my faith if it were proved to me that, say, evolution were true. I think the creation account leaves a lot of room for allegory potential.

Dude, there are so many holes scientifically in that theory that it's laughable.

[John the Roman]

Dude, there are so many holes scientifically in that theory that it's laughable.

neither JP2 nor B16 seem to think so. I lean toward creationism too but I think evolution is possible. I'm just not sure, Catholicism gives me the choice though so I'll decide at some point.

[Xeno]

Dude, there are so many holes scientifically in that theory that it's laughable.

Please clarify on this. I'd like a list of some of these "holes" you speak of.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

In b4 referencing things like Lee Strobel or contemporary apologetics.

Anyway, pretty much what Peanut said. I'm voting "no" on the whole thing.

[FllMtl Novelist]

Dude, there are so many holes scientifically in that theory that it's laughable.

I hate to add another response to this (since this is supposed to be a non-debate section), but I want to clarify for Jordan: he's speaking hypothetically, not arguing for it. He's not even commenting on evolution's credibility. His point is that it wouldn't shatter his faith if certain parts of the Bible were proven fictitious, or merely metaphorical.

[Atria35]

Dude, there are so many holes scientifically in that theory that it's laughable.

Talking about evolution vs creationism has been very divisive in the past, and theological discussion about it has been banned before.

So guys, it's probably best to leave it at this. Rules are that we give our opinion and move on, not mock or debate other's.

[goldenspines]

Atria is correct. The rules for this section state: [quote="Christian Growth Q and A"] Rule #1: Respect everyone.
You don't have to *agree* with someone, but you *do* have to respect them. Remember, Christ died for every single person on this planet - including the person you just called a moron. This rule is not negotiable]
(source: http://www.christiananime.net/showthread.php?t=61224)

Next time someone tries to pick a fight (as a prime example, Sierra Lee's post towards Otaku Jordan), they will face a strike and the thread may be closed. Most of you have been around long enough to have read the rules for this section (and for the forum in general). Follow them or you won't be posting for much longer.

[Nate]

Man how come no one ever argues about abiogenesis.

[SierraLea]

You were just trying to get me to ask what that was, weren't you? Well, I'm asking.

[Neane]

You were just trying to get me to ask what that was, weren't you? Well, I'm asking.

http://bit.ly/WEHF9c