*

+
/ Topic >  Re: More Defending the Black Pharaoh /
/ Forum > TOL - General Theology: In Search of the F.P. /
/ Copy to >  Newsgroup: alt.bible.prophecy / 23Feb2002 /
.
> On 19Feb geralduk wrote:
> The history of man is nigh 6000yrs old
.
 textman replies: Where did you get that figure from, geralduk?
I seriously doubt that it comes from the scriptures.
btw: Doesn't it seem like they've been saying the same 6000
years for several centuries now? How does that work anyway? Do
the years stretch themselves out accordingly? Or do they shrink
instead? And how could you tell the difference in either case?
.
> and no longer according to the scriptures.
.
 I don't think it ever was. There's *some* history in the Book,
but it hardly covers the million years of humankind's presence
on this world. Huge gaps indeed!
x

+
>> textman previously say: More Defending the Black Pharaoh
>> <snip> 1) a prophet seeks and promotes the truth
>> 2) a prophet denies and resists error
>> 3) a prophet acts with power and conviction
>> 4) a prophet is of use and value to God
>> 5) a prophet praises and worships God
>> 6) a prophet teaches the people, and leads them in prayer
>> 7) a prophet is a tradition-breaker and a tradition-maker
>> 8) a prophet is a writer and/or an original thinker <snip>
.
> On 19Feb [later the same day even] Melody wrote:
> Actually, Enoch is the first recorded prophet
.
 textman replies: Hi Melody, glad you could join the party.
Now then, if you're going to make fancy statements like this,
you should be ready at once with much copious evidence with
which to support thy most attractive boldness. :)
... So I'm guessing this is it just below us here:
.
> Gen 5:21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years,
.
 Not bad for those times.
.
> and begat Methuselah:
.
 He did this without the participation of some nice
lady-friend? Hmmm, that's some potent seed there folks!
.
> Gen 5:22 And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah
> three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
.
 That's a lot of time for some serious begatting!
.
> Gen 5:23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred
> sixty and five years:
.
 Exactly three hundred years of begatting added to the normal
life-span. Obviously none of this is meant to be taken as accurate
historical accounts of real people. Rather the meaning of these
particular numbers is essentially symbolic, or rather spiritual.
The lesson here is that even a brief "walk with God" - whatever
that specifically means - is so bristling with life energies that it
manifests as more than triple the normal allotment of nature.
The specific stress on abundant life is further enhanced by the
meaning of the making of many offspring, which basically is the
traditional way of indicating a full and good life. In other words,
God is so good that even a small contact is too much to be
contained in one short lifetime.
.
> Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God:
.
 Wuttaya mean he 'walked with God'? The text just said (in 5:22)
that he walked with God before the 300 years of begatting. Or
wait a minute, maybe you can't do both at the same time? Maybe
he walked with God for a short time "after he begat Methuselah"
then took some time off to make *MANY* sons and daughters,
and THEN resumed his walk with God!!!
.
> and he [was] not; for God took him.
.
 This is usually taken to mean that he left our world
without the bother of dying first.
.
> Hbr 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated
.
 He was wut? 'translated' you say? riiiight
.
> that he should not see death;
.
 Perhaps as a reward for all that begatting?!
.
> and was not found, because God had translated him:
.
 btw: What did he translate him into? Fron-say maybe?
.
> for before his translation he had this testimony,
> that he pleased God.
.
 Well duh! I *guess* that's why God walked with
him in the first place ...
.
> Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam,
.
 In the second century CE it was supposed that Enoch was the
seventh generation from Adam because seven was a sign of
perfection. Again the meaning of numbers is meant to be taken
symbolically, NOT literally.
.
> prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh
> with ten thousands of his saints,
.
 One brief surge of fortune-telling (courtesy of the second century
CE) might constitute evidence for the presence of a fortune-teller
or sooth-sayer, but that's about it. In other words, one brief
"prophecy" does not a prophet make. In this case Judas is the
prophet putting prophetic words into the mouth of Enoch (who
never was a real historical person anyway).
.
 Well Melody, all you've proven so far is that the prophet Judas
was a prophet. But since he lived in the Common Era he cannot
possibly qualify as a legitimate candidate for first prophet.
.
  ... Nice try though :)
.
- the entirely untranslated one - textman ;>
x

+
/ Topic > Re: More Defending the Black Pharaoh /
/ Forum > TOL - General Theology: In Search of the F.P. /
/ Copy to > Newsgroup: alt.bible.prophecy / 26Feb2002 /
.
> On 23Feb Melody wrote: As this is a theolgy forum
> I reserve the right to claim that the scripture
> is true and does not lie.
.
 textman replies: And I reserve the right to agree with you :)
.
> Why wouldn't man have a lifespan of 100's of years
> before the flood.
.
 Because life on this planet doesn't work that way.
.
> They were still a very few generations away from the
> original model created by God himself. Before the flood
> there must have been a different atmosphere than today as
> until the flood there had not been rain helping to decrease
> ultraviolet damage. They were also still vegetarians.
.
 Yeah, very interesting there Melody. Too bad there is like
ZERO evidence to support these absurd fantasies of yours.
... And then they have the nerve to accuse me of unsubstantiated
speculation! Clearly there is a world of difference between
extrapolating from the known facts and established evidence,
and just whipping up some silly ideas to "explain" any ol thing
you wish. Hey Melody, if our ancestors were all vegetarians,
why did they hunt various game animals? Just for the fun of it
maybe?
.
> As for the number of 6,000 years, a little simple math
> will support these numbers.
.
 If its so simple, why don't you explain it to us?
.
> You obviously do not believe that the scripture
> is the word of God
.
 You obviously are not at all familiar with my prophetic
scribblings, else you would not make such an outrageous
accusation.
.
> and therefor will dismiss this post
.
 Wrong again, Melody. I dismiss your post solely and
entirely because it is silly and thoughtless.
.
> but God's word will not fail and God is not a liar.
.
 God's Word will not fail, but childish readings of it certainly will.
God is not a liar, but fundy interpretations of the sacred text MAKE
Him into a liar by shoving a wedge between grace and reality, and
then proceeding to tear the two apart! Real smooth move, exlax ...
.
                 - one who integrates and unifies - texttman ;>
x