Probably some of the greatest errors in Biblical understanding occur because folks take literally what should be understood spiritually. Jesus told those to whom he preached that they erred because they didn’t take into consideration that the words he spoke were spiritual (John 6:61-63), and they kept trying to make sense of them literally (John 6:60). We can avoid this type of misunderstanding, if we use the word of God to interpret itself for us, by comparing one part of Scripture with another part (1Corinthians 2:13). Read the rest of this entry »
Tag Archives: flood
Most folks, today, who believe the Bible look for the Day of the Lord to arrive soon, but given the geocentric information offered in the New Testament, what would such an event look like today? What do the Scriptures say about this day, and should we understand them literally or is there another way to see them that fulfills what we are told, but doesn’t destroy everything God created? Peter writes about the “world that then was” as he speaks of the judgment of the Flood, implying that ‘the heavens and earth’ existing in Peter’s day were different from what we would have found before the Flood. Yet, not only did Noah’s ‘heavens and earth’ pass away to make room for that which Peter knew, but Peter tells us to look for yet ‘newer heavens and a newer earth,’ different from what existed in his day. In other words, the scriptures speak at least twice of God making new heavens and a new earth, the final one coming with the Day of the Lord in which Christ would come. What does all this mean, and can we know?
Many modern critics of the Bible have a vested interest in the idea that Jesus (if they even admit that he ever existed) is both dead and buried somewhere near Jerusalem. It wasn’t really that much different in the first century AD. The idea of anyone rising from the dead was completely foreign to what people might think about a hero or an enemy. Such a thing had no place in the worldview of Hellenistic society or any other ancient culture, despite what some folks like to say today. Peter claimed in 2Peter 3:5 that the scoffers of that day were willingly ignorant or forgetful. The reason being, they have a vested interest in the idea that Jesus must be dead and could not be the Messiah (cf. Mark 12:6-7). Dead men don’t live again, or so they wished it were true (2Peter 2:1-3; 3:5). What they desired to be so ruled their reasoning of what should be true, so their foolish hearts were darkened (2Peter 2:4; Romans 1:21). Read the rest of this entry »
Peter mentioned in 1Peter 3:19-20 that the Spirit of Christ preached to the world before the Flood through Noah, the servant of God. He then went on to say that believers in Christ are saved by baptism through the resurrection of Christ, and this is a like figure of how Noah and his family were saved. Many Christians today interpret this to mean that water baptism saves us in some way, usually saying that just as the flood in Noah’s day saved those on the ark from the evil people of the world then being judged by God, so water baptism, which is our public testimony that we stand in Christ, saves us from the evil of our society. The problem with this interpretation is that it is unscriptural and illogical. Read the rest of this entry »
Largely because of the scientific community’s predominant belief in the theory of evolution and that theory’s need for great ages for the earth, the Genesis Flood is no longer considered an historical event by many in the scientific community and elsewhere. Prior to Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species, the historicity of the Genesis account had been questioned by only a few within scientific groups. Indeed, catastrophism was the most widely held theory for understanding the geologic layers observed throughout the world. Read the rest of this entry »