Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
He is obviously not referencing the nazarite vow, rather, another topic entirely. It appears more to be in reference with established customs of etiquette of the Hebrew people, but I’m not sure. I think connecting these two separated verses to create a “contradiction” is silly, especially when it could be refuted. The author himself was a Nazarite
If you have to wrap it in a caveat like that, it's not "100% literal" is it? There's plenty of others. Want to try a different one?
I like to call it “reading the full text and understanding context”
i.e. "not 100% literal".
Yes, I believe it’s important to let the scriptures speak for and interpret themselves, rather than superimpose our own ideas or opinions upon them. Let God speak and believe what He says...that’s my perspective.
Yes. One thing I appreciate about the producers, is that one can see, a lot of research, goes into trying to be as accurate as possible.Very cute video and I agree way more close to the Bible's account that most other presentations I have seen.
I liked the way the ark itself was presented...not as some kind of ship, but as a floating box. That is what an ark is after all...a container to hold things that are precious....like the Ark of the Covenant.
Loved the kangaroos too
heh, in terms of imagining the ark, the sensible idea in that recent big budget Noah movie (2014, with Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins -- pretty entertaining!) -- was that the animals all were put to sleep, basically a total hibernation. So, Russell Crowe didn't have to clean any pensYes. One thing I appreciate about the producers, is that one can see, a lot of research, goes into trying to be as accurate as possible.
Another thing I like is the artwork. The animators are good! Oh, and good lessons... and funny too.
I probably watched all of them, and keep looking for more.
Regarding the ark though, they really took the time to consider what some skeptics might not consider. They would be work to do on the ark - cleaning the pens, just as we do, with our animals. Disposing of waste would not require scientific knowledge ... overboard it went.
Also, something else we do, when we get animals, is we buy the young. No one buys an old sheep. God would obviously know that the young animals would be ideal, for all the right reasons. So we don't expect Noah had to feed huge mammoth elephants for a ye\ar.
...and early to rise... early to work. The ark was kept clean, as the video shows.
Come to think of it, it looks cleaner than some people's homes.
(while things like how much, how big etc. are trivial side distractions to the much deeper things actually in the text, one could pack in a lot of animals if they were all just sleeping like the dead the whole while)
Matthew: 24-29 is a prime example. The references of the falling stars, moon stops shining etc. are actually about Jewish proclivities. Nothing literal. Few are aware.
Some imagination.heh, in terms of imagining the ark, the sensible idea in that recent big budget Noah movie (2014, with Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins -- pretty entertaining!) -- was that the animals all were put to sleep, basically a total hibernation. So, Russell Crowe didn't have to clean any pens
Ah, I found a trailer for it: (while barely any of it expected to be just like events perhaps, it was fun to watch, almost as good as the trailer much of the time)
More than a little -- they imagined all sorts of stuff to fill in the blanks. I'd recommend it to anyone as fun to watch.
That's entertainment for you. I tend to watch things not merely to be entertained though. If they go too far, it turns me off, especially where the Bible is concerned.
Agree! Emphatically.
Exactly! I actually love watching Biblical epics just to pick the ‘imaginative licence’ taken with them. There were way more in that one than in most. Talk about filling out the story with things never mentioned in the Bible!
Probably about 90% fiction......never let the truth get in the way of a good story though....right? 
One belief is required and the other belief isn't. This follows from something I've been reading about the catholic church. Christians are required to believe certain things just as Jews are required to believe certain things. You simply believe these things. You don't use proofs or hypnosis. You just do it. You hold hands and say amen at the prayer. For some people this is easy, but others object. You don't have to go through mental arguments and figure out how to believe.
Doing what it wants is what is important. I literally do what the whole Bible wants, and passages in it tell me not to literally believe the whole Bible. Therefore by not believing the whole thing literally I do what it wants.
Way back in the 60s, I was taught, by my fairly traditionalist parish priest, that Original Sin is the intrinsic disposition of mankind towards sinfulness. In other words a moral weakness. It has always seemed to me that the allegory of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (not the tree of knowledge, please note) is a metaphor for Man's acquisition of moral awareness as he arose from the other apes. This awareness brings with it an obligation to act morally - which Man often fails to do. So I see it as a loss of innocence, as happens when a child grows up - which is a bittersweet thing, is it not?
Abelard thought differently.
To add to my previous post, one can elaborate an argument as follows: