Fox News anchor Bill Oâ€™Reilly, who is writing an upcoming book titled â€śKilling Jesus,â€ť proclaimed on his program Wednesday night that â€śa lot of the Bible is allegorical,â€ť and the New Testament Gospels contradict themselves.
Oâ€™Reilly made the remarks during an interview with â€śTouched by an Angelâ€ť star Roma Downey and her husband Mark Burnett, executive producers of â€śThe Bibleâ€ť TV miniseries which begins this Sunday night on the History Channel.
Downey, who portrays Jesusâ€™ mother Mary in the series, opened the interview by declaring her solid faith in Holy Scripture.
â€śBringing the Bible to the screen came with a huge responsibility and one we took very seriously,â€ť Downey said. â€śWe had a great team of scholars and theologians helping us, making sure that we told these stories accurately and truthfully. Iâ€™ve been a believer my whole life, and that was very, very important to us. Something else...
Left & Right Voices in Talk Radio & TV I was looking for something else on this site, and ran into the above. It is rather interesting to see what Dan thought of various commentators. I will say one thing, he was wrong on Paul Harvey. I do believe Paul was trending towards being a Seventh day Adventist. his taste in food was going that way, he was beginning to sound like a vegetarian. I think some stations in western Nebraska may have even kick them off the air for that attack on eating beef. This is of course, matters little since Paul Harvey's death several years back now. Anyway, this looks like a good article to put up at this particular location.
Christopher000 wrote: Hi John, I'll look it up when I am home. Def Nephelim and King James, I believe. I'll find out the specific references though. Anyone fornicating with anyone from the line of Seth wouldn't produce a giant, but I'll be more specific with my arguments when I have a Bible handy and can look things up. Thanks for chiming in.
The word Nephilim occurs in the ASV, not KJV at Gen 6.4 and Nos 13.33.
Hi John, I'll look it up when I am home. Def Nephelim and King James, I believe. I'll find out the specific references though. Anyone fornicating with anyone from the line of Seth wouldn't produce a giant, but I'll be more specific with my arguments when I have a Bible handy and can look things up. Thanks for chiming in.
Christopher000 wrote: Oh, ok...I understand the confusion. J for J, I had meant to address my post to John/UK, but I just said, "John" in the post. He had asked me a question concerning the Nephelim but Jim answered it.
Hello Christopher, if anything they are Anakites. Numbers 13:33.
Genesis 6:4 KJV 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
You seem to think there is a people group called Nephilim?
I think once in awhile we should look at Billy's comment a lot of the Bible is allegorical. I would suggest that he would look at a Christian's view of that idea.
G. H. Schodde wrote: .... The Protestant church, beginning with Luther, has at all times rejected this allegorizing and adhered to the safe and sane principle, practiced by Christ and the entire New Testament, namely, Sensum ne inferas, sed efferas ("Do not carry a meaning into (the Scriptures) but draw it out of (the Scriptures)"). It is true that the older Protestant theology still adheres to a sensus mysticus in the Scriptures, but by this it means those passages in which the sense is conveyed not per verba (through words), but per res verbis descriptas ("through things described by means of words"), as e.g. in the parable and the type.
In homiletics allegorizing is applied to the method which draws spiritual truths from common historical statements, as e.g. when the healing of a leper by Christ is made the basis of an exposition of the healing of the soul by the Saviour. Naturally this is not interpretation in the exegetical sense.
John for JESUS: I would say that these two passages describe different events, but close in time. In Matthew, Jesus calls Peter and Andrew by the Sea of Galilee. For the first time, he tells them they will be fishing for people. Some time not much later, in Luke, Jesus uses Peter's boat to preach from, and has Peter and his fishing partners put out into deep water to fish and Jesus's second statement that he would be fishing for people. There is no rule that Jesus can only say something one time and one time only. The beauty of the gospels is how they are NOT verbatim reflections of each other. If they were, we would say, hey, there is a conspiracy here or someone just copied someone else. However, just like witnesses in a courtroom, when they give the same account, but in different words from different perspectives, that is the most powerful evidence of all.
JOE LEE...Matt 4:18-22 says Jesus walks by the sea of Galilee and calls out to Peter and Andrew who are casting nets and they follow Him. Then Jesus goes alittle further and calls out to John and James who are mending nets and they leave everything to follow Him. Luke 5 says Jesus goes to the lake of Geneserate, sees two empty boats bc they are washing the nets, He climbs aboard and preaches, they go fishing, and then when they get back they end up leaving to follow Jesus.
No, I do not believe the centurion account was mistranslated. The custom in that day and culture was to send an intermediary to ask for such a favor from an important person -- to avoid to avoid the face to face embarrassment and not put them on the spot (I guess we still do that today). Furthermore, Matthew condensed his account because he added other details not included in Luke. When writing then, space was a premium, as may imagine. The words Matthew used changes nothing about the meaning. It would be like me saying, John, thanks for coming to me. Well, you haven't really come to me physically, but through another means. Regarding the calling of the apostles, can you tell me which books or verse you are referring to so I don't widely miss the mark.
JOHN FOR JESUS: On the king issue, there are 2 explanations. The first is that he started reigning at 8 as a coregent but didnt actually start making decisions and ruling until 18 after his father died. The second possibility is that there are differing extant manuscripts due to copyist error. However neither impacts the inerrancy, inspiration and infallibilty of Scripture. We hold these truths about the original manuscripts, not translations such as kjv, niv etc.