7,584
edits
Alphabet before words: Difference between revisions
From 2nd Book
Jump to navigationJump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
{{1c| | {{1c| | ||
Before God could use the words "Let there be light" <ref>{{bgw| Ge 1:3 }}¶ And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.</ref> <ref>יהי אור</ref>, he had to form the alphabet. | Before God could use the words "Let there be light" <ref>{{bgw| Ge 1:3 }}¶ And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.</ref> <ref>יהי אור</ref>, he had to form the alphabet. | ||
}} | |||
{{1c| | |||
Could he have spoken without an alphabet? God could do anything he wants, but why would he? The alphabet is foundation to his revelation of himself to man. We can demonstrate that both Paul <ref>{{bgw| Eph 1:4 }} According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:</ref> and John <ref>{{bgw| Eph 1:4 }} According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: </ref>were familiar with the plan God had before he created. <ref group="q">How would Paul and John know God's plan before the beginning?</ref> <ref group="a">Either they knew it from scripture, the alphabet, of God gave them special facts as a small taste of omniscience. Can you find their knowledge in the scripture? No? In the alphabet? Yes. Then why would we need to presuppose they got special propositional facts?</ref> | |||
}} | |||
{{1| | |||
The bride is indicated by the zayin ז, and the lamb slain by the qof ק. Since it is plausible that the alphabet precedes the use of words, there is no reason to presume other sorts of 'revelation' that only serve as seeds of doubt with no basis in scripture. | |||
}} | |||
|} | |||
{{refx}} | |||
}} | |||
