Two Creation Stories

[Thief]

Yes it's long been proven the Genesis creation, as well as any other creation stories from the ancient world aren't literally true. So what? Is literalism really the point, or is conveying the idea that there was a creation the point? I could go around proclaiming my Egyptian creation myths were entirely literal, but we all know the reaction I'd get. I think we need to keep in mind that not literal doesn't mean not true.

Could we say....
There is a Creator....
He created Man.
He then altered the course of Man.......?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Could we say....
There is a Creator....
He created Man.
He then altered the course of Man.......?

Then that makes Genesis literally true to you Thief?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

This kind of faith won't carry you far.

I hope you are being sarcastic.

Hence the :sarcastic at the end.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Believe both, or believe one or the other. Or believe neither. Whichever means something to you, believe that. If neither mean anything to you, then wait until they do. Believing in the creation story is not about believing that God made everything and this is the order and all that nonsense.
Think of it this way: What exactly is God creating? The physical world we live in? Science has already been able to explain that, so I'm thinking not. So what then, is God really creating?

First, God created the invisible spirit realm where angels reside.
As one person said God next decided to expand the family business of Creation "Father&Son" and add to the invisible realm a visible realm or our material physical realm.

Before Science explaining, Isaiah [40v26] already explained that God is the one whose power supplied the high-density dynamic energy to create.
-Jeremiah 10v12; 32v17; Psalm 104v30

 

[watcher102]

Well I do believe that god created us in his image! I take it literally god is everything around us and that we make up apart of god. I think Gensis does mention this. That means we are more connected than just a spiritual connection, but of a physical one. If I'm dying than apart of god is as well, no matter how small.

 

[Thief]

Then that makes Genesis literally true to you Thief?

To include the words....evolution....science and medical processes....yes.

 

[sojourner]

They were delivered that way.
Are you wanting me to rearrange the writing for your pleasure?

Are you hedging to the notion that the creation of Man was a magic show....
'poof'...there he stands?

"Delivered" by whom? Many texts are placed out of chronological order in the Bible. Usually, it's opined that the editors, themselves, wanted to get a particular point across. Therefore, any "meaning" inherent in the order, itself, is derived from human understanding, not Divine message.

You seem to place great emphasis in the meaning inherent in the order in which the stories are placed. Further, you seem to feel that such meaning is God's revelation. Clearly that's not the case.

No, I don't hedge the notion of magic in creation -- at least no more so than you are hedging the notion of the stories being in the order they are because "God wanted it that way." What I am saying is that the writers had no clue as to the science involved in creation, nor was it their intent to write a scientific account. It was their intent to write a theological treatment of creation.

 

[watcher102]

"Delivered" by whom? Many texts are placed out of chronological order in the Bible. Usually, it's opined that the editors, themselves, wanted to get a particular point across. Therefore, any "meaning" inherent in the order, itself, is derived from human understanding, not Divine message.

You seem to place great emphasis in the meaning inherent in the order in which the stories are placed. Further, you seem to feel that such meaning is God's revelation. Clearly that's not the case.

No, I don't hedge the notion of magic in creation -- at least no more so than you are hedging the notion of the stories being in the order they are because "God wanted it that way." What I am saying is that the writers had no clue as to the science involved in creation, nor was it their intent to write a scientific account. It was their intent to write a theological treatment of creation.

:faint:I'm newbie here trying to read up on new stuff and well I seen all the different religions and writters and got overwhelmed. No wonder so many have such different ideas and views, even new age stuff and well you see it all around us, confusion. But I did notice that even in being theoretical they did seem to try and fit it with their beliefs at the time which has to do with the science of those times. So we have to take it with a grain of salt! Ever seen that movie Nell???

It's about a wild woman who was raised in the wild with nobody else around, her and a twin sister born from a rape victim of those times. They were raised to stay inside doors during the day time and only come out at night to be safe. Her grandma at the time had strokes and so talked with a english draw and the paralysis caused the woman to be raised speaking a different language unknown, until they figured out the impairment. Her twin sister died at a young age, and her grandma constantly read from an old bible. It was their only means to communicate and learn. Really touching true story!

Could it be that we need to figure out more than what is written but whom was writting what for what reasons and how did they see the world at that time to influence the writtings? If so than I'm looking to read some of the oldest textes without the influence of todays theories of what was being said. Can anybody help me on this?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

First, God created the invisible spirit realm where angels reside.
As one person said God next decided to expand the family business of Creation "Father&Son" and add to the invisible realm a visible realm or our material physical realm.

You got the creation down perfect. But you are mistaking the creator.

 

[thedope]

Everything arises with conception. We are all juggling creation stories all the time. We must get to the bottom of it.

 

[sojourner]

Could it be that we need to figure out more than what is written but whom was writting what for what reasons and how did they see the world at that time to influence the writtings? If so than I'm looking to read some of the oldest textes without the influence of todays theories of what was being said. Can anybody help me on this?

You're talking about what's known as the exegetical process -- that is, "reading out" of the text.
Commentaries use this process. Some are better than others. The good ones are pretty scholarly and assume a certain level of scholarship on the part of the reader. Harper-Collins is a decent, concise commentary. The New Interpreter's Bible is also good -- not as "thick" as, say, the Anchor Commentary. Luke Timothy Johnson's Sacra Pagina is good, too.

 

[Ram36]

I like your comment and I do agree. We worry to much on who has the truth. We need to be working on practicing what is truth.
Peace.,....

 

[Thief]

"Delivered" by whom?

A poor redirect. ...at this stage of the discussion

Many texts are placed out of chronological order in the Bible. Usually, it's opined that the editors, themselves, wanted to get a particular point across. Therefore, any "meaning" inherent in the order, itself, is derived from human understanding, not Divine message.

You seem to place great emphasis in the meaning inherent in the order in which the stories are placed. Further, you seem to feel that such meaning is God's revelation. Clearly that's not the case.

No. The emphasis is placing evolution into Day Six.
And biological manipulation into Chapter Two.

No, I don't hedge the notion of magic in creation -- at least no more so than you are hedging the notion of the stories being in the order they are because "God wanted it that way." What I am saying is that the writers had no clue as to the science involved in creation, nor was it their intent to write a scientific account. It was their intent to write a theological treatment of creation.

True the 'writers' had no clue.
They wrote about God...and what God was doing.
The scientific terms aren't there because they did not...and would not... understand them.
That doesn't mean...evolution did not happen.
Nor does it mean the course of Man was not altered by God...after Day Seven.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

True the 'writers' had no clue.
They wrote about God...and what God was doing.
The scientific terms aren't there because they did not...and would not... understand them.
That doesn't mean...evolution did not happen.
Nor does it mean the course of Man was not altered by God...after Day Seven.

The first prophecy [Genesis 3v15] was before day 7.

Jesus proves to be the 'seed' that will deal Satan a fatal death bruise to his head. -Hebrews 2v14 B.
So that means God did not alter the course of his purpose for earth.
-Isaiah 45v18

Although some Bible writers lived centuries apart their writings are in harmony with each other.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I like your comment and I do agree. We worry to much on who has the truth. We need to be working on practicing what is truth.
Peace.,....

'what is truth'.....Jesus believed the Holy Scriptures are religious truth.-John 17v17

Jesus also taught that 'truth' [religious truth] would set us free from what is false.

The people of Acts [17v11] searched or researched the Scriptures daily to see if what they heard was really so; really found in Scripture.
-2nd Tim 3vs16,17

 

[gnostic]

I like your comment and I do agree. We worry to much on who has the truth. We need to be working on practicing what is truth.

Though I don't accept religious "truth", I do understand that the wisdom comes from doing "good" and understanding what is good (or as you would say "practising what is truth") are far better than boasting you're "good" ("who has the truth").

Never understood why Christians and Muslims claimed that they have the true religion or whose scriptures or prophets are better. Does it really matter?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Though I don't accept religious "truth", I do understand that the wisdom comes from doing "good" and understanding what is good (or as you would say "practising what is truth") are far better than boasting you're "good" ("who has the truth").

Never understood why Christians and Muslims claimed that they have the true religion or whose scriptures or prophets are better. Does it really matter?

I don't know, especially since neither the Bible or the Quran state to have the exclusive truth, at least not from a critical exegesis. One can parrot what their pastors or Imams say and argue that I suppose. The NT says everyone will be judged according to their works and the gospel, from Paul's words. The Quran says anyone who believes in Allah (generic form of god) and the last day and does good works they will not grieve.

 

[Thief]

The first prophecy [Genesis 3v15] was before day 7.

Jesus proves to be the 'seed' that will deal Satan a fatal death bruise to his head. -Hebrews 2v14 B.
So that means God did not alter the course of his purpose for earth.
-Isaiah 45v18

Although some Bible writers lived centuries apart their writings are in harmony with each other.

I'm aware of the claims the new testament has about Jesus.

This thread is about Adam and Eve.

 

[sojourner]

True the 'writers' had no clue.
They wrote about God...and what God was doing.
The scientific terms aren't there because they did not...and would not... understand them.
That doesn't mean...evolution did not happen.
Nor does it mean the course of Man was not altered by God...after Day Seven.

Yes, evolution happened, but not according to the system put forth by Genesis.
We alter our own course.

 

[Thief]

Yes, evolution happened, but not according to the system put forth by Genesis.
We alter our own course.

You are denying Chapter Two?