|  fireforchrist | Nov 2, 2007 12:45pm | There was a desire expressed to have a discussion on the Book of 1 John so here it is.
I guess the best place to start would be in the beginning and it seems that John thought the same.
1:1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life-- NASB
this translation is very simple for this verse
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
The Word of life existed from the beginning. We have heard it. We have seen it. We observed and touched it.
This verse seems to echo the first verse of the gospel of John
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
I have had a vague thought that maybe 1 John is sort of a commentary of the Gospel of John. I do not know how far this thought could be taken but it certainly starts out the same. |
|
| 
Sponsor |  lesoldham | Nov 3, 2007 6:48pm |
Indeed John seemed to have a deep revelation of who Christ is and he
begins his gospel and his letter in a way that suggests this.
The first verse of the gospel of John sounds so much like Genesis 1 and
it suggests the metaphorical or figurative interpretation of Genesis 1.
Gen1:1 IN the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Gen1:2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was[fn1] on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Gen1:3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
My interpretation by simply doing a word study from Strongs concordance.
In the beginning God created the spiritual realm and the physical realm. And the
physical realm was in confusion and darkness (2822 choshek kho-shek' from 2821; the dark; hence figuratively, misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness:--dark(-ness), night, obscurity.) was before the face (always in the sight) of the deep. (the deep or waters refer metaphorically to the masses of people, see Psalms or Revelation) And the Holy Spirit was hovering over the face (in the sight of) the people. And God said "Let there be light" and there was light. 215 'owr ore a primitive root; to be (make) luminous (literally and metaphorically):--X break of day, glorious, kindle, (be, en-, give, show) light , set on fire, shine). 216 illumination or (concrete) luminary (in every sense, including lightning, happiness, etc.):--bright, clear, morning, sun.
Thus the very first verses of the Torah were about Christ and John stresses that Christ was in the beginning. Indeed the first verses of the Bible are a gospel of salvation.
|
|
| 
Sponsor | | usmjam | Nov 5, 2007 10:17am | 2) Great observation! John the beloved Apostle seems to have the clearest understanding that Jesus indeed always was, is and will be the eternal Word of God and the Light that dispels the darkness of sin & death. Later in John's book of the Gospel Jesus is referred to as that very light.
Without Jesus we are spiritually dead, very much as the world in Genesis was void and without form. The light that dispelled the darkness in Genesis is a foreshadow of Jesus (again, great observation):
John 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
Yet that light was to be rejected by mankind:
John 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------1) The start of 1 John seems intent on reaffirming that Jesus is the Word of God spoken of in John's book of the Gospel. But in addition John is reminding us that the Word, God himself, became man. Jesus who performed the miracles and who arose from the dead was among them as a very real person whom they saw and touched before and after the resurrection, just ask Thomas! If I may extend it to the next verse:
1 John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
1 John 1:2 For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us; |
|
|
| | fireforchrist | Nov 9, 2007 7:21pm | 2~ I disagree that there is a metaphorical interpretation implied on Genesis because of those verses. What you are doing sounds to me like eisegesis. I do not think it would be good to discuss that here in depth, and you know what I think about this. I think the only time a metaphor is found in the Bible is when it is literally metaphorical in context. The main thing is I do not see how these scriptures imply a metaphor in Genesis. I love you brother and I do not want you to be think I am harsh, unbending and unwilling to hear another point of view. I want you to know I am not speaking out of malice or ill will.
"Indeed the first verses of the Bible are a gospel of salvation."
Yes, I understand that the above is what John is trying to say in all this.
If Jesus is the Word ("And God said")which created all things in the beginning, then the word of Jesus is so powerful. His word is powerful because at His word light energy was created, at His word the whole world came into being. This makes me wonder at the power in the name of Yeshua. To the extent that you turn Genesis into a metaphor you turn the power of that name into a metaphor.
Me: I believe in the great power of the name of Yeshua's name, because at his word the worlds were formed. At his word the mountains were formed. At his word the earth brought forth all life.
Mr. Metaphorical: I believe in the great power of Jesus' name. Jesus was metaphorically the Word that created the world in a metaphorical sense, not really in any supernatural way just as a metaphor of something supernatural. At his word the world was created in a metaphorical week. I know that Jesus' name has power to do the miraculous things like raise me in the last day because nature obeys His word in a metaphorical way.
Forgive me for being blunt but I hope you appreciate honesty. I hate it when plain simple things are turned into metaphors. I hate it when the simplicity of words are turned into meaningless jumbles of psudoeducated (Did I make up a word?) wisdom. Mr. Metaphorical nullifies the very Word of God.
Everything can be interpreted metaphorically. What keeps you from interpreting other things metaphorically? Mr. Metaphorical did not used to think that the feeding of the five thousand was just a metaphor but now he does. He used to think that the resurrection was really going to happen, but he found that it was silly to believe that so now he is thinking that it must be a metaphor. He thinks now that Christianity is only for those who need a psychological security.
There is a natural explanation for everything, if one has enough bad, blind, faith to go his own way.
I want to warn you not to go down that Rd. It becomes a slippery slide. |
|
|
Sponsor | | lesoldham | Nov 9, 2007 8:58pm | Gal 4:22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman.
Gal 4:23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise.
Gal 4:24 This is allegorically speaking, for these {women} are two covenants:
one {proceeding} from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be
slaves; she is Hagar.
Gal 4:25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.
Gal 4:26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother.
Jhn 16:25 "These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; an hour is
coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but
will tell you plainly of the Father.
Jesus used and expected his disciples to understand figurative (metaphorical) language.
Paul was unashamed to interpret seemingly literal language into its allegorical meaning thus adding to the richness of the Word of Life. The metaphorical interpretation of Genesis does not take away anything from the literal interpretation it only adds a depth of meaning that demonstrates Gods plan.
A slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy.
|
|
| 
|  3DJelly | Nov 10, 2007 4:26am | The difference is in not taking things literally when the writer clearly intends them to be literal. Just because something can be taken metaphorically doesn't mean it didn't actually happen. Examples:
-Matthew referred to the Exodus (of the Hebrew people from Egypt) as a metaphor for Joseph, Mary, and Jesus' return from Egypt after the death of Herod. Yet clearly the Exodus is not just a parable that somebody made up.
-Hosea's marriage and faithfulness to his wife was a metaphor for God's faithfulness to Israel. At the same time, Hosea's wife's unfaithfulness and status as a prostitute was a metaphor for Israel's unfaithfulness to God and the Covenant. Yet it is clear that Hosea's life was meant to be read literally. We know all this because Hosea records that God asked Hosea to marry a prostitute precisely for the purpose of making this metaphor for the rest of Israel.
Sometimes God explains things in more ways that just by word of mouth. Prophecies and parables and such are sometimes acted out in real life as well. To dismiss these accounts as "just stories" based alone on the fact that they're metaphors is indeed to go down the slippery slide that FireforChrist spoke of. But to ignore the metaphorical value behind them is to miss out on the richness of the message as Lesoldham pointed out. |
|
|  |  438731 | Nov 10, 2007 6:08am | Matthew referred to the Exodus (of the Hebrew people from Egypt) as a metaphor for Joseph, Mary, and Jesus' return from Egypt after the death of Herod. Yet clearly the Exodus is not just a parable that somebody made up.
Clearly it is. 600,000 men (plus women, children and the elderly) in the desert, so let's conservatively say about 2,000,000 people pottering around with Moses for 40 years. For a start, that's far greater than the number of Israelites at the time:
1 Kings 20:15 - "Then he numbered the young men of the princes of the provinces, and they were two hundred and thirty two: and after them he numbered all the people, even all the children of Israel, being seven thousand."
And 2,000,000 people wandering a desert for 40 years are gonna leave something behind, aren't they? A few corpses here and there? Broken pots? Anything? Nope. Nothing. Nada. Amazing huh? But then the pentateuch was apparently written by a bloke (Moses), who somehow manages to report his own death in Deuteronomy!!!
You can't take this literally. You just can't. And FireForChrist, believing in talking snakes is just embarrassing! :P |
|
|
| | 3DJelly | Nov 10, 2007 7:05am | My point was whether or not the writer INTENDED for it to be taken literally. If the reader chooses not to, then that's that. But what the writer INTENDED should be pretty clear.
By the way, What was your point with the refernce to 1 Kings? I'm not sure what you mean. And the part where you assume the record of Moses' death was written by Moses himself is rather silly. As for leaving things behind. Yes they did leave something behind. They're called descendents. You might have heard of the State of Israel somewhere in the news at some point? |
|
| | | 438731 | Nov 10, 2007 10:19am | 1 Kings: How many Israelites were there? 7000? Certainly not 600,000 men.
Moses death: Allegedly* Moses wrote the pentateuch. No mean feat given that he was dead part way through Deuteronomy!
*
Exodus 24:4,7; 34:27-28;
Numbers 33:2
Deuteronomy 1:1-5; 4:4-5; 31:9,24-26
Joshua 1:7; 8:32-35
Judges 3:4
1 Kings 2:3
Ezra 2:6
Nehemiah 9:14
Malachi 4:4
Mark 12:26;
Luke 16:29-31
John 1:17; 5:45-47; 8:5
Acts 15:21
2 Corinthians 3:15
My point about leaving something behind is fairly simple. Highly motivated, Jewish, Israeli archaeologists have scoured the Sinai desert looking for evidence of the exodus. To date they have found nothing. It doesn't take a genius to conclude that THERE WAS NO EXODUS! |
|
|
Sponsor | | lesoldham | Nov 10, 2007 10:49am | | Ahab, king of Israel was a king after David and after the division of Israel into two nations, Judah and Israel. this was over a thousand years after the exodus. d4m, at least read the whole book before taking a verse out of context and trying to make a point using it. |
| |
| |
Apologetics → Discussion