• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can a literal Genesis creation story really hold up?

gnostic

The Lost One
thief said:
and there was a war in heaven....and one third of heaven fell.

The only references to rebellion in heaven come from the NT Revelation, which never occurred in Genesis. In fact, the rebellion never appeared in the Hebrew scriptures (or OT).

So what's your point in bringing in up?

What has my post to do with yours?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
There were no plants of the field because there was no rain

There were no plants of the field because there was no man to cultivate them

The garden was on a mountain

The garden divided into four streams that included the Tigris and Euphrates.

The garden was where fig trees grew.

The garden was near plants were grown to make bread.

There is only one time when domesticated plants were not grown and then were grown. It is the time of a drought far worse that any in history, the end of the Younger Dryas. There is only one mountain that divides into four rivers inc the Tigris and Euphrates and where Figs and Wheat grows, Karacadag. This is exactly when and where scientists say wheat and probably the whole farming package was domesticated.
How do you know the garden was on a mountain? The text mentions no mountain.

Pinpoint "where fig trees grow." Because fig trees grow throughout the region.

How do you know the garden was near where plants were grown to make bread? Bread isn't mentioned in Genesis 2.

There is no geographical evidence of four rivers, as the text mentions.

These aren't facts you've given me. They're conclusions based upon pure conjecture -- not evidence actually found in the text. You'll have to do much better than that, if you want to posit that Gen. 2 is literal.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Chosen specimen, isolated conditions, examination, anesthesia, surgery, cloning, genetic manipulation......a test...and release into the environment.
What you describe is more science fiction than science experiment.
 
You describe a non-god entity, a scientist. People conduct experiments to learn, God would not need to learn if he is all knowing.

God wouldn't create if he was all powerfull, in the first place.
You make the protagonist of your story all powerfull, you have no plot, because you can't have any motivation for anything. An all-powerfull thing wouldn't even get any story started, let alone a universe ;)
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
God wouldn't create if he was all powerfull, in the first place.
You make the protagonist of your story all powerfull, you have no plot, because you can't have any motivation for anything. An all-powerfull thing wouldn't even get any story started, let alone a universe ;)
Why not?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Written by whom?
I think it remarkable such detail so many centuries before the possibilities could be shown as do-able.
Do you think that Chester Gould was as remarkable coming up with a Sony product 79 years prior to its debut?
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Do you think that Chester Gould was as remarkable coming up with a Sony product 79 years prior to its debut?

Not in comparison to Genesis.
The items and terms found in Genesis are thousands of years in advance of Man's discovery of such possibilities.
 

Iti oj

Global warming is real and we need to act
Premium Member
Not in comparison to Genesis.
The items and terms found in Genesis are thousands of years in advance of Man's discovery of such possibilities.

What? That's the silliest thing I. Have heard. Your interoperation not based upon scripture is not miraculous... What is there that shouldn't be?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Not in comparison to Genesis.
The items and terms found in Genesis are thousands of years in advance of Man's discovery of such possibilities.
And looking back on Dick Tracy, we think of them as fantasy comic books -- even though the technology is presented 80 years before the fact.

But looking back on Genesis, technology that hasn't yet come to fruition is science?
 

gnostic

The Lost One
greentwiga said:
There is only one time when domesticated plants were not grown and then were grown. It is the time of a drought far worse that any in history, the end of the Younger Dryas. There is only one mountain that divides into four rivers inc the Tigris and Euphrates and where Figs and Wheat grows, Karacadag. This is exactly when and where scientists say wheat and probably the whole farming package was domesticated.

There is no mountain or are no mountains mentioned in Genesis 2.

The Tigris and Euphrates don't come from same mountatin. The sources of the two rivers are on different mountains, and they are only joined downstream in southern Iraq, before emptying in the Persian Gulf.

Furthermore, prior to 1600 BCE, the Euphrates and Tigris were joined; they used to emptied out into the gulf separately and the gulf's shoreline was further inland. The ancient Sumerian city of Ur used to be a coastal city, situated on one side of the mouth of Euphrates. The shoreline was different in the 3rd millennium BCE, to the shoreline of when the exodus supposedly happened or when David and Solomon were kings.

When Genesis 2 was composed in the 8th (or 9th) century BCE, the place (meaning rivers & gulf) was different to 4th and 3rd millennia BCE, geographically.

And where were Pishon and Gihon? Where does Pishon and Gihon join the other 2 rivers? And where were Havilah and Cush?

There are no agreement as to where Havilah and Cush were. Or whether Pishon or Gihon exist. How do you get fact when something, someone or something might not exist.

It say there only one river in Eden (2:10) before dividing into 4 (2:11). And yet how is that possible?

Again, there were no mountain mentioned in Genesis 2.

Quite frankly, you are using words like "fact" or "evidence" way too loosely.
 
Last edited:

greentwiga

Active Member
he said facts not fantasy

Are you saying that mankind did not invent farming by domesticating plants that need cultivating?

Are you saying that the Younger Dryas was not a time of drought in the middle east far worse than any since?

If you take these Specifics in the Bible and examine Google Earth, in between the Tigris and Euphrates, above the 200mm isohyut line and below the 7,000 foot line (both requirements for wheat and figs (or do you dougbt this?) There is only one place in the rather small region where four rivers can be said to come from the same place,(a snowpack), the Mountain, Karacadag. The Bible states that Before Adam, there were no plants needing cultivating (domesticated) and after him, there were, ie bread.

Do you dispute that Heun, et al stated that wheat was domesticated on or extremely near Karacadag?
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Are you saying

I am saying what you posit is laughable.

Your literal attempt is rather pathetic

There were no plants of the field because there was no rain

There were no plants of the field because there was no man to cultivate them

The garden was on a mountain

The garden divided into four streams that included the Tigris and Euphrates.

The garden was where fig trees grew.

The garden was near plants were grown to make bread

Fantasy


Not fact.

Provide Facts, if you can ever figure out what a FACT is :facepalm:
 
Last edited:

outhouse

Atheistically
The Eden in Ezekiel appears to be located in Lebanon.[11] "t appears that the Lebanon is an alternative placement in Phoenician myth (as in Ez 28,13, III.48) of the Garden of Eden",[12] and there are connections between paradise, the garden of Eden and the forests of Lebanon (possibly used symbolically) within prophetic writings.[13] Edward Lipinski and Peter Kyle McCarter have suggested that the Garden of the gods (Sumerian paradise), the oldest Sumerian version of the Garden of Eden, relates to a mountain sanctuary in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon ranges.[14]

Garden of Eden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


the oldest Sumerian version of the Garden of Eden


Can you actually read this?? or you just ignore people with real educations and follow fantasy and imagination instead???


Do you understand what pre existing traditions even means :facepalm:
 

Because if you are all powerfull, you can't have any unfullfilled desires anymore.

"I'm hungry? Nope, I'm not anymore!"
"I'm bored? Nope. Not anymore!"
"I want somebody to talk to? Nope, not anymore!"
"I want somebody that worships me? Nope, not anymore!"

There is no reason to do anything at all, because there is no "wanting" anything. Because "wanting" is the results of being in the position of currently not having something...
Which is impossible, if you are all-powerfull, because you already have everything, at the tip of your finger.
 

greentwiga

Active Member
How do you know the garden was on a mountain? The text mentions no mountain.

Pinpoint "where fig trees grow." Because fig trees grow throughout the region.

How do you know the garden was near where plants were grown to make bread? Bread isn't mentioned in Genesis 2.

There is no geographical evidence of four rivers, as the text mentions.

These aren't facts you've given me. They're conclusions based upon pure conjecture -- not evidence actually found in the text. You'll have to do much better than that, if you want to posit that Gen. 2 is literal.

Mountain: If you want to go to where waters divide between two rivers, you go to the watershed divide between them. It is a line between the rivers. The continental divide is the biggest one in America. For a division among four rivers, it has to be a higher point, a hill or mountain. At such a high point, there is a single point that divides the Mississippi, Colorado, and Rio Grande basins. Look on Google Maps and you'll see that only at Karacadag does the watershed divide into four rivers/streams. This includes the Khabur River (mentioned in the Bible) which winds before entering the Euphrates. The fourth river circles up past Cayonu past ancient sources of gold and flint, before entering the Tigris.

Fig trees: Look at the center of wild diversity of the figs that became the domestic figs. They are in Syria but extend into Lebanon, Israel, and Southern Turkey. Scientists state they never made it over the Taurus Mountain barrrier before humans carried them because of the cold. They are also limited by a need for at least 250 mm of rain per year. There is only a small region that is between the Tigris and Euphrates that meets these requirements, and Karacadag is in the center. Wild figs grow in that region, and best in the center of it.

Bread: Adam is condemned to eat bread by the sweat of his brow. only wheat has gluten and is used to make bread. Prior to the invention of the farming package, humans gathered wild wheat. This did not involve cultivation. They say that wheat grew so prolifically on Karacadag that one family could harvest enough in two weeks to feed themselves for a year. Thorns and thistles were not a problem. When wheat was altered (and they say it could have been altered in one generation.) It could not survive on its own. Scientists state there were two key genetic changes. After that, land had to be plowed, Thistles which grow in such disturbed land became a problem, and farming became much more labor intensive. A good starting point is Heun, et al. on the domestication of wheat. Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel has some interesting things to say about the invention of Agriculture. He shows how the region is a food producing Garden compared to the rest of the world.
 

greentwiga

Active Member
There is no mountain or are no mountains mentioned in Genesis 2.

The Tigris and Euphrates don't come from same mountatin. The sources of the two rivers are on different mountains, and they are only joined downstream in southern Iraq, before emptying in the Persian Gulf.

Furthermore, prior to 1600 BCE, the Euphrates and Tigris were joined; they used to emptied out into the gulf separately and the gulf's shoreline was further inland. The ancient Sumerian city of Ur used to be a coastal city, situated on one side of the mouth of Euphrates. The shoreline was different in the 3rd millennium BCE, to the shoreline of when the exodus supposedly happened or when David and Solomon were kings.

When Genesis 2 was composed in the 8th (or 9th) century BCE, the place (meaning rivers & gulf) was different to 4th and 3rd millennia BCE, geographically.

And where were Pishon and Gihon? Where does Pishon and Gihon join the other 2 rivers? And where were Havilah and Cush?

There are no agreement as to where Havilah and Cush were. Or whether Pishon or Gihon exist. How do you get fact when something, someone or something might not exist.

It say there only one river in Eden (2:10) before dividing into 4 (2:11). And yet how is that possible?

Again, there were no mountain mentioned in Genesis 2.

Quite frankly, you are using words like "fact" or "evidence" way too loosely.

The waters come from the same snowpack. The Waters that flow north wind all the way around a region of land. One of the earliest farming towns, Cayonu, is in that area. This could be Havilah. Placer gold and flint were both found in the area. The waters flowing south also wind dramaticaly. This is the Khabur. People have lived along the river for tens of thousands of years. A group such as the Kassites (KS and CSh are identical in Hebrew, when is is a translation from another tongue) could have been the Cush mentioned.

I don't see how the Flandrian Transgression of the Persian Gulf in Sumerian times is relevant. At the time of Adam and Eve, the Persian Gulf was a river for up to half its length due to the still melting Ice Age. Since the gulf was far too dry for wheat or Figs, the region can't possibly be the location of the Garden.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Bread: Adam is condemned to eat bread .

And they have found these grains in what Galilee thousands of years before your place :facepalm:


Ohalo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Ohalo is the common designation for the archaeological site Ohalo II in the vicinity of the Sea of Galilee, and one of the best preserved hunter-gatherer archaeological sites of the Last Glacial Maximum, having been radiocarbon dated to around 19,400 BP.[1] The site is significant because of the numerous fruit and cereal grain remains preserved therein, (intact ancient plant remains being exceedingly rare finds due to their quick decomposition).
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
Because if you are all powerfull, you can't have any unfullfilled desires anymore.

"I'm hungry? Nope, I'm not anymore!"
"I'm bored? Nope. Not anymore!"
"I want somebody to talk to? Nope, not anymore!"
"I want somebody that worships me? Nope, not anymore!"

There is no reason to do anything at all, because there is no "wanting" anything. Because "wanting" is the results of being in the position of currently not having something...
Which is impossible, if you are all-powerfull, because you already have everything, at the tip of your finger.

A God who doesn't want anything, has no wants. What if he wants wants? He can't want or get wants if he doesn't have any, so he still would be unfulfilled since he's missing out on desires.

I think that want, desire, need, etc, is the force that drives things forward. A God with emotions and thoughts who had not wants or desires wouldn't create this world. A God like that, must have something that he needs or desires to create the world.

A God who is all-powerful is lacking one thing. There's one thing he can't be. He can't be impotent. He can't be without power. So there's something he can't be and can't do even after having all power.

In other words, omnipotence, omniscience, and all those mega-ginormous words that supposedly encapsulates everything are problematic to begin with. They're not good qualifiers for what a God is. It's like trying to find the highest integer in the infinite series of whole numbers.
 
Last edited:
Top