I wholly agree with this. You can say most of it is an allegory of faith, rather than just simply true events. This reminds me of a Chinese Tao saying from Laozi:
That was a while ago and nothing ever came from it anyway. I think there just aren't enough regular posters on the thread for it catch on. That said, if we could get something going I'm certainly in. Maybe I'll
Needless to say, there is a great deal of discussion over the meaning of the passage. Is the angel Moses? God's presence? An actual angel? The second person of the Trinity (for Christians)? Admittedly, this is a speculative theory, but I believe that this passage may be connected with Joshua in some way - he is the only figure in the Torah, aside from Jochebed the mother of Moses, to have a theophoric name based on YHWH (ones using El are very common). Special mention of this is noted in Numbers 13:16, and of course he is the one who eventually leads the Israelites into the promised land. There is also Deuteronomy 31:1-3:
Who is going ahead of the Israelites - God or Joshua?
I believe the Bible is, as the Catholics put it, "the words of God in the language of men" (there is also a similar Jewish saying). You can never be entirely sure of anything in life - men can be fallible but I think that you can still believe there is something greater behind it.
Yeah exactly! Despite the flaws (in our modern lenses), there is still a lot to respect. Even an irreligious person can find solace in the more timeless texts.
I've been listening to JP's Bible series lately, and a lot of it clicks when you think about it. Even if what's told is allegorical, primarily in the Old Testament, there's underlying psychological truth there in what it's saying, and what it's saying is, in my opinion, too deep and interwoven to just be passed off as superstition. Even if you don't follow the metaphysical aspect, if you're irreligious or atheistic, there's something there that touches on the human psyche and nature with shocking accuracy, and it's something people can learn from.
I remember that time when Kent said that since the KJV was used by Paul and it was good enough for him, then it should be good enough for anybody or some shit.
Kent has ever since descended into more madness than that. He, like many other scammers, has set a date for Christ's return, (2068 if I recall correctly), which stands in blatant contradiction with how Jesus said no one knows the day of His return except the Father, denies the Sabbath commandment to this day, has been denounced by at least one website for endorsing The Shack and teaching from it (a pentecostal voodoo-jumbo book, later adapted into a movie, where God is reportrayed as a black woman) and is mostly concerned with his Dino-themed park. Just about the only useful things he says are about the KJV and debunking evolution, he is an idiot otherwise. The KJV and the issues around it are not invalidated just because some idiot or something an idiot says about them though, let me make this clear.
Heavy stuff but well worth the effort to dig through.
Hs sounds kind of like today's typical new ager syncretic rhetoric.
Psalm 78 is one of two retellings of the Exodus in the book, the other being found in psalms 105/106. If you count the plagues listed here, you will notice that there are three missing* - lice, boils and darkness (the third, sixth, and ninth plagues respectively). I have my own theory as to why this is, but I'd like to hear your thoughts before I share it. I'll give you two hints - what do the missing three plagues have in common, and how does that fit in with what psalm 78 is trying to teach? Secondly, doesn't verse 49 look like it's out of place? It doesn't seem to be describing a specific plague, so what is it doing here? Again, look in the rest of psalm 78 and see if you spot anything.
Food for thought. IMHO, those three plagues were omitted for the sake of conciseness, or for some other reason, the author did not think them important to mention. Verse 49 could be understood as God having unleashed some of those plagues upon the Egyptians by letting wicked angels loose on them (the KJV says "evil angels", for clarification). Psalm 78 teaches us about the Lord's providence and forgiving, forbearing nature, even if at times he turns angry on us, or some truly unrepentant ones are to pay the ultimate price.
You're more or less in the same direction I was heading. The commonality among plagues three, six and nine is that they are delivered without warning, and it may be that the author of Psalm 78 considers them unfit to use as an example of divine retribution for that reason - they were a special punishment for Pharaoh, and God wouldn't normally act that way.
He did ask god directly for wisdom, so It's one of the more perplexing parts of the bible. Did god think he could use the power without becoming corrupt? Or did he know he was gonna run with demons and it had to happen for some reason? He straight up gave him the tools to summon and bind demons.
I agree with that up to a certain point, but various circumstances in my life have led me to believe the new testament is almost entirely true barring a few misremembered details.
I mean Solomon was just the wisest. He does a good job as king and enriches his people, but he’s still just a man. He can still fall to temptation.
If you like this, then maybe check out Leon Kass. I have his book on Exodus.
