Symbolism or Literalism
I find it interesting that biblical literalists insist that the whole world was covered by water during "Noah's flood" because the Bible says so. They also insist that during the plagues of Egypt, The Nile River turned to actual blood because it is stated that way in the Bible. Those same people, when they read that Moses saw Jehovah, deny that it actually happened, even though the Bible says that it did happen.
Theologians have invented interesting words to get around this problem. These sightings of Jehovah are called theophanies. That is another way of saying we don't believe what the Bible says so we will give it a fancy name.
Theologians have invented interesting words to get around this problem. These sightings of Jehovah are called theophanies. That is another way of saying we don't believe what the Bible says so we will give it a fancy name.
When the Bible speaks of Jehovah's physical characteristics they are called anthropomorphisms. It seems that, in cases of their own choosing, accepting the Bible literally is not important.
Whatever they have learned is what they will believe even if they have to change the Bible to make it agree with what they believe. This has been done a lot in the modern easy to read versions.
Whatever they have learned is what they will believe even if they have to change the Bible to make it agree with what they believe. This has been done a lot in the modern easy to read versions.
It is so easy to attribute anything unknown to supernatural forces. One of the plagues that fell on Egypt, before Pharaoh dismissed his slaves, was that the water in the Nile turned red. We read all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood. Literalists, of course, insist that it means that the water became blood.
Basically, I am a literalist, but when there is a logical interpretation, why twist common sense out of shape? In my blog of The Revelation, I wrote: There is a danger of rewriting the Bible if one adds or subtracts words from the text, and yet, the meaning must make sense or it is nonsense. Certainly here, in Rev. 8:11, when it says, the water became wormwood, something needs to be done with the meaning. The only way this statement could be true, as it is written, is if The Mediterranean Sea became a plant called wormwood. A much more likely meaning is that the waters became as bitter as wormwood.
Check out: The Amazing Amalgamated Apocalypse Amplified
So, since there is a logical explanation, why not accept it. In reference to The Nile turning red, notice the following:
Check out: The Amazing Amalgamated Apocalypse Amplified
Why Water Turns Red
So, since there is a logical explanation, why not accept it. In reference to The Nile turning red, notice the following:
In Texas, government agencies similarly explained the phenomenon naturally, claiming the red color in the reservoir was the result of severe droughts in the area, which produced a lack of oxygen in the water, causing certain bacteria to thrive.
In the Netherlands, local officials have downplayed speculation that the supernatural is turning the canal red, declaring the phenomenon is “almost certainly” a natural bacterium.
Delfland Water Board spokeswoman Inka Vogelaar told Telstar, “We’ve been through this once before. That was this summer in a ditch somewhere in Westland.”
Read more at:
the red color in the reservoir was the result of severe droughts in the area, which produced a lack of oxygen in the water, causing certain bacteria to thrive. This is a particularly interesting statement, in light of the fact that the story of Joseph in Egypt, shows us that Egypt was subject to droughts. In Joseph's time, they had a severe drought that lasted seven years.
Many types of bacteria can infect multiple organs of a fish. One such common infection is caused by the Aeromonas salmonicida bacteria. It is generally due to poor sanitation or nutrition, and is recognized by the red ulcers which cover the fish.
http://www.petmd.com/fish/conditions/skin/c_fi_aeromonas
So the evidence seems to align with the idea that the red water was the result of the bacteria in the water, which, in turn, was the result of a drought. Perhaps it was the bacteria in the water that killed the fish in the Nile at the time of Moses. Let's not look for supernatural causes if natural causes seem evident.
So Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt, and the frogs came up and covered the land of Egypt. And the magicians did so with their enchantments, and brought up frogs on the land of Egypt. Ex. 8:6-7.
How bizarre! The magicians were more interested in their own prestige than they were in the comforts of their fellow Egyptians. If they could, indeed, produce frogs, could they not also have destroyed some. It would have been much more practical and comfortable than trying to prove that they were just as powerful as the God of the Hebrews.
The last plague that troubled Egypt at that time was the death of the firstborn. The following quote is from a blog I did earlier. Then, one day, when the Lord had just had enough of Pharaoh's stubbornness, He spoke to Moses and said, now is the time of beginnings. Ex. 12:2. A new year is starting and new things are going to happen to you and to my people. I want all of my people to kill one lamb per family, if possible; they are to eat the meat, but above all, they must put blood on the doorposts and on the lintels.
Why? Because it is the Lord’s Passover. Ex. 12:11. That is, the Lord will pass over the houses of the Egyptians and the Israelites in a UFO, and, with an undefined blood detector, he is going to take readings of all the doorposts. If the Lord’s blood detector does not reveal any blood on the doorposts the Lord will kill the firstborn of that house, whether Egyptian or Israelite.
If, in fact, this God of the Israelites knows everything, why did he need the technicality of actual blood on the doorposts? Why not just let Jacob's offspring exercise faith, a faith that the Egyptians apparently, did not have. Could the Lord not have based his “killing mission” on the presence or absence of faith?
The Lord himself said it is the LORD’S passover. For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD. Ex. 12:11-12.
The word, Passover, seems so very expressive of the Lord passing over a nation's buildings, perhaps, in some kind of a flying machine.
So the evidence seems to align with the idea that the red water was the result of the bacteria in the water, which, in turn, was the result of a drought. Perhaps it was the bacteria in the water that killed the fish in the Nile at the time of Moses. Let's not look for supernatural causes if natural causes seem evident.
So Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt, and the frogs came up and covered the land of Egypt. And the magicians did so with their enchantments, and brought up frogs on the land of Egypt. Ex. 8:6-7.
How bizarre! The magicians were more interested in their own prestige than they were in the comforts of their fellow Egyptians. If they could, indeed, produce frogs, could they not also have destroyed some. It would have been much more practical and comfortable than trying to prove that they were just as powerful as the God of the Hebrews.
The last plague that troubled Egypt at that time was the death of the firstborn. The following quote is from a blog I did earlier. Then, one day, when the Lord had just had enough of Pharaoh's stubbornness, He spoke to Moses and said, now is the time of beginnings. Ex. 12:2. A new year is starting and new things are going to happen to you and to my people. I want all of my people to kill one lamb per family, if possible; they are to eat the meat, but above all, they must put blood on the doorposts and on the lintels.
Why? Because it is the Lord’s Passover. Ex. 12:11. That is, the Lord will pass over the houses of the Egyptians and the Israelites in a UFO, and, with an undefined blood detector, he is going to take readings of all the doorposts. If the Lord’s blood detector does not reveal any blood on the doorposts the Lord will kill the firstborn of that house, whether Egyptian or Israelite.
If, in fact, this God of the Israelites knows everything, why did he need the technicality of actual blood on the doorposts? Why not just let Jacob's offspring exercise faith, a faith that the Egyptians apparently, did not have. Could the Lord not have based his “killing mission” on the presence or absence of faith?
The Lord himself said it is the LORD’S passover. For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD. Ex. 12:11-12.
The word, Passover, seems so very expressive of the Lord passing over a nation's buildings, perhaps, in some kind of a flying machine.
No comments:
Post a Comment