Understanding the holy scriptures is impossible unless God gives you the interpretation

[74x12]

Isaiah 6:8-10
I heard the Lord’s voice, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”

Then I said, “Here I am. Send me!”

He said, “Go, and tell this people,

‘You hear indeed,
but don’t understand.
You see indeed,
but don’t perceive.’
Make the heart of this people fat.
Make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes;
lest they see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their heart,
and turn again, and be healed.”

Isaiah 29:10-14
For Yahweh has poured out on you a spirit of deep sleep, and has closed your eyes, the prophets; and he has covered your heads, the seers. All vision has become to you like the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one who is educated, saying, “Read this, please;” and he says, “I can’t, for it is sealed;” and the book is delivered to one who is not educated, saying, “Read this, please;” and he says, “I can’t read.”

The Lord said, “Because this people draws near with their mouth and honors me with their lips, but they have removed their heart far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men which has been taught; therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder; and the wisdom of their wise men will perish, and the understanding of their prudent men will be hidden.”

 

[74x12]

Here’s more context:

6 Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom, though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to perish. 7 But we speak God’s wisdom, secret and hidden, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But, as it is written,

“What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,
nor the human heart conceived,
what God has prepared for those who love him”—

10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 11 For what human being knows what is truly human except the human spirit that is within? So also no one comprehends what is truly God’s except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. 13 And we speak of these things in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual.

14 Those who are unspiritual do not receive the gifts of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to them, and they are unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 Those who are spiritual discern all things, and they are themselves subject to no one else’s scrutiny.

Nothing in here about “understanding the Bible.” This is about spiritual gifts. It doesn’t list the Bible as a spiritual gift. That simply is not either explicit nor implied. It’s a misinterpretation and is misused in the OP.

So the Bible is not a gift of God's Spirit? Or falling under the category of the thoughts of God? (2 Timothy 3:16)

1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Luke 24:44-45
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Luke 24:25
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:

We are all naturally fools and slow of heart to believe or understand the scriptures. Without Him we are like the beasts that perish. (Psalm 49:20) Without Him we won't understand it at all. (Proverbs 30:3) I wouldn't go on relying on the wisdom of wise men which will perish and the understanding of the prudent which will be hidden. That's because they're wise in their own eyes and they have been resisted by God; but He'll show His truth to those who humble themselves like little children.

 

[sojourner]

So the Bible is not a gift of God's Spirit? Or falling under the category of the thoughts of God

No. Not in the way the text in question means by “gift of the Spirit.”

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Which basically means only the Messiah can truly reveal the scriptures (Isaiah 29:18).

In my opinion.

The Messiah? Is that what Jesus said? No... Jesus said his Father, the One who sent him (John 17:1-3), was the One who revealed -- or hid -- His Word. -Luke 10:21.

Any enlightenment Jesus received, was from his Father, his God...the God of Israel. - John 20:17
John 8:28, New Heart English Bible....
Jesus therefore said to them, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and I do nothing of myself, but as the Father taught me, I say these things."
Prophesied in Deuteronomy 18:18.

I wholeheartedly agree w/ the thread title!

 

[Hockeycowboy]

....a worldwide flood.....contradicts scientific knowledge.

What knowledge, specifically?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Many Christians don’t believe in taking all of Genesis literally as the scientific evidence that contradicts a young earth and a worldwide flood is overwhelming.

If a person believes in the Biblical Global Flood, does that necessarily mean he has to believe in a Young Earth?

If so, why?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What knowledge, specifically?

Pretty much all of it. Physics, chemistry, geology and biology, all tell us there was no global flood.

 

[Audie]

What knowledge, specifically?

You seriously really-really don't know?

 

[Audie]

If a person believes in the Biblical Global Flood, does that necessarily mean he has to believe in a Young Earth?

If so, why?

Prolly doesn't have to but might as well.
There is no practical limit to what a person can believe once they've swallowed the flood.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Pretty much all of it. Physics, chemistry, geology and biology, all tell us there was no global flood.

Nice references you provided! All serious evidence I've ever found refuting it, revolves around the debunking of a Young Earth.

The two concepts are not tied together.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nice references you provided! All serious evidence I've ever found refuting it, revolves around the debunking of a Young Earth.

The two concepts are not tied together.

None needed for such a vague question.

Tell me your version of the Flood and I will tell you how science refutes it. I am betting that you decide to cook Noah and family.

 

[Audie]

Nice references you provided! All serious evidence I've ever found refuting it, revolves around the debunking of a Young Earth.

The two concepts are not tied together.

You sure didn't look very hard if all you found involved " young earth".

I suppose some does, but the big picture consists of
-zero data / evidence consistent with a world wide flood, ever.
-a great variety of data sources that falsify any "flood" hypothesis at any time.

You, like, don't know that ?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I suppose some does, but the big picture consists of
-zero data / evidence consistent with a world wide flood, ever.

Are you kidding me?! As much as you & I tango'ed with this....

You never explained the origin of the fresh-water Permafrost, sin the Flood: extending from the Siberian plain far into northern Canada, and deep enough to find well-preserved megafauna submerged deep within it.

Or neither have you, nor anyone else for that matter, provided any accepted explanation for the related Pleistocene extinctions.
Et.al.

The Global Flood, does.

So, until you and others can give an acceptable alternate explanation, I'll take any debunking attempts with a grain of salt!

 

[McBell]

Are you kidding me?! As much as you & I tango'ed with this....

You never explained the origin of the fresh-water Permafrost, sin the Flood: extending from the Siberian plain far into northern Canada, and deep enough to find well-preserved megafauna submerged deep within it.

Or neither have you, nor anyone else for that matter, provided any accepted explanation for the related Pleistocene extinctions.
Et.al.

The Global Flood, does.

So, until you and others can give an acceptable alternate explanation, I'll take any debunking attempts with a grain of salt!

So basically you are saying, in a nutshell, that you are right until someone convinces you you are wrong?

 

[McBell]

The Global Flood, does.

Where did all the extra water come from?
Where did it go?

 

[Audie]

Are you kidding me?! As much as you & I tango'ed with this....

You never explained the origin of the fresh-water Permafrost, sin the Flood: extending from the Siberian plain far into northern Canada, and deep enough to find well-preserved megafauna submerged deep within it.

Or neither have you, nor anyone else for that matter, provided any accepted explanation for the related Pleistocene extinctions.
Et.al.

The Global Flood, does.

So, until you and others can give an acceptable alternate explanation, I'll take any debunking attempts with a grain of salt!

Not kidding, but you sure come up with silly things.
But I was just mentiining- for lo :
You would never accept anything no matter what if it messed up your brliefs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you kidding me?! As much as you & I tango'ed with this....

You never explained the origin of the fresh-water Permafrost, sin the Flood: extending from the Siberian plain far into northern Canada, and deep enough to find well-preserved megafauna submerged deep within it.

Or neither have you, nor anyone else for that matter, provided any accepted explanation for the related Pleistocene extinctions.
Et.al.

The Global Flood, does.

So, until you and others can give an acceptable alternate explanation, I'll take any debunking attempts with a grain of salt!

Nope, the flood cannot explain permafrost. If anything you end up cooking Noah and family. But then you know this, which is why you refuse to go into detail in your version of the flood. All you can say is 'the flood predicts this'. It does not.

Now what do you not understand about permafrost? You seem to be rather confused as usual. Permafrost should be fresh water since it is a land based phenomenon. Why would it be anything but fresh? You seem to have a rather strange objection.

 

[Audie]

Nope, the flood cannot explain permafrost. If anything you end up cooking Noah and family. But then you know this, which is why you refuse to go into detail in your version of the flood. All you can say is 'the flood predicts this'. It does not.

Now what do you not understand about permafrost? You seem to be rather confused as usual. Permafrost should be fresh water since it is a land based phenomenon. Why would it be anything but fresh? You seem to have a rather strange objection.

That's all a creo rabbit hole.

All any theory, like ToE needs to disprove it is contrary data

Flood is different that way. Disprove it one way,
and there are still mammoth frozen "deep " in permafrost! How do we know they are down there? Um, how? But they prove the flood.

Disprove it as many ways as suit, there will
always be a way to play "yeah but this clam
fossil proves flood."

 

[Hockeycowboy]

None needed for such a vague question.

.

I didn't ask any question. In post #845, I asked for specific knowledge. That's not vague.

For that matter, I was not asking you, was I? I asked @adrian009 .

Well, adrian009? Have you really examined the evidence yourself, or have you relied on others to tell you what to think on this subject?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Nope, the flood cannot explain permafrost. If anything you end up cooking Noah and family. But then you know this, which is why you refuse to go into detail in your version of the flood. All you can say is 'the flood predicts this'. It does not.

Now what do you not understand about permafrost? You seem to be rather confused as usual. Permafrost should be fresh water since it is a land based phenomenon. Why would it be anything but fresh? You seem to have a rather strange objection.

As I thought. No explanation.