• 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!

Non-literal Genesis Evidences

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Yes...but :)
to me, as non-believer in the absoluteness of the Bible, official cannons mean very little.
so, the Book of Jubilees , as quoted by @The Anointed , makes much sense to me as a reasonable explanation.

I hope I have time to read this book. I appreciate any writer or artist who attempts to expand on the story of the Bible.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Oh that's new to me. How interesting. Can you refer me to a source to read about it?

Here's one.
Did life begin on land rather than in the sea? A paradigm-shifting hypothesis could reshape our idea about the origin of life

Others I read referred to the consensus now that life didn't emerge
in the hot thermal vents - an idea which was fashionable for a generation.
It's seriously interesting.
Reminds me of Darwin's "warm little pond" theory.
It wasn't long ago when scientists thought the early earth was hot and dry, certainly not wet.
Then we discovered the secrets of zircon crystals.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Not all opinions are created equal. Why should yours be deemed credible?

Some thought King David was some form of symbolic myth. But there are now
two archaeological references to the "House of David"
So now people will say that the stories around David are symbolic myths.
I hold Revelations and lots of Daniel to be symbolic.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Here's one.
Did life begin on land rather than in the sea? A paradigm-shifting hypothesis could reshape our idea about the origin of life

Others I read referred to the consensus now that life didn't emerge
in the hot thermal vents - an idea which was fashionable for a generation.
It's seriously interesting.
Reminds me of Darwin's "warm little pond" theory.
It wasn't long ago when scientists thought the early earth was hot and dry, certainly not wet.
Then we discovered the secrets of zircon crystals.
Thanks very much for this. I had indeed been thinking that the hydrothermal vent hypothesis was the favoured one. I am obviously not up to date.

I have read that the cations of salt water tend to inhibit the formation of polymers, posing a problem for the hydrothermal vent idea. So this alternative would get rid of that difficulty.

I have also read some very interesting idea about the possible influence of silicate minerals as adsorbing agents, capable of holding molecules stably in position while reactions between them occur, such as polymerisation. Also how chirality in biochemistry may have arisen due to differential adsorption on chiral mineral faces, such as calcite. I suppose all this is easier to imagine on a shoreline, or indeed a fresh water hydrothermal pool, so that you get a cycle of wetting and drying.

Cool.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
So how did Cain find a wife in the land of Nod if he was the offspring of the first man and women (Adam and Eve) on earth?

Genesis 4:16
It is true the story does not explain this. It seems a thin place in the plot, except Eve is called the mother of all the living. To me it follows in the atory that Cain marries either a half or a full sister - full presuming that she is Adam's. I think that is the gist but not a focal point in the plot.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
...I am uncovering the literary similarities between stories in Genesis and the stories from the Mahabharata. So in general shared motifs between stories, especially as they come in large groups of connected motifs, show that Genesis is a literary production, a fiction based on the sacred fictions of other cultures, rather than an historical account of actual events...
I am revisiting this, because I did not perfectly follow the reasoning. If Genesis were an account of our timeline then that would mean similar accounts were innacurate. How then would the Mahabharata stand up as having priority over Genesis as a historical account?
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
And how about the heaven and earth formed by God
And our earth as an oceanic cloud planet
With the continents emerging
And life forming, first on "land" (fresh water) and then in the sea.
And from the sea came birds as well as sea creatures
and the last thing to form was man.
That is actually the narrative of science, as well as Genesis.
How did the bible know?
It seems more that the earth is formless and void in the beginning. That is, there is no land at all. The land is formed by the pulling away of water from water as well as the separation of darkness from light. The two separations together make the earth. So then there is the water above and below the land, and there the land exists between water as well as between day and night.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
It seems more that the earth is formless and void in the beginning. That is, there is no land at all. The land is formed by the pulling away of water from water as well as the separation of darkness from light. The two separations together make the earth. So then there is the water above and below the land, and there the land exists between water as well as between day and night.

Yes, it's like when it says "all the earth" was flooded. You have to understand what was
this Bronze Age guy talking about? The "earth" here could have been real earth, as
opposed to the planet as we see it. But the continent rose through the action of water
upon the subduction process - creating the lighter granite. The early earth wasn't just a
water planet, it was also probably as cloud planet, like Titan. Thus it was dark, even though
the sun had to have been present.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Some thought King David was some form of symbolic myth. But there are now
two archaeological references to the "House of David"
So now people will say that the stories around David are symbolic myths.
I hold Revelations and lots of Daniel to be symbolic.
That's nice ...
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
I am revisiting this, because I did not perfectly follow the reasoning. If Genesis were an account of our timeline then that would mean similar accounts were innacurate. How then would the Mahabharata stand up as having priority over Genesis as a historical account?

From the tidbits of knowledge i have regarding this my understanding is that the Mahabharata is older. I suspect that much of Genesis was written when the Jews were in captivity and there the authors may have had exposure to the Mahabharata.

However, I will admit this is speculation. Perhaps a better speculation of mine is that there was a common framework of epic employed by multiple cultures which developed in the oral tradition and was "captured" as epic became written. I suspect that Genesis and the Mahabharata and the Greek epic which includes Homer's work as well as the Titanomachy all spring from this great source.

The rough outline of that framework would be as follows:
  • Origin and corruption through the generations of the world
  • The great war whose outcome turns on a trick
  • Divine intervention but with more significant human action
  • Fallout stories
This framework may have been an organizing principle for stringing together various stories and weaving them into a great story. Such stories would surely lined the pocketbooks of the greatest oral story tellers who were wanted to satisfy their audiences need to "binge watch" what they had to offer.

Now the Mahabharata is, perhaps, the best preserved and most literarily sophisticated example of this framework. The Greek Epic has suffered from loss (probably in no small part at the hands of Christians rioting in Alexandria). The Bible seems to have adopted the formula in small and used it throughout the Bible not so much as an organization to the whole but as a way to sculpt its larger narrative histories. Genesis figures most prominently in this area.

In many ways the Genesis story seems to differ from other similar narratives in a way that also suggests that it was written in response to and in direct contrast with that earlier framework. Aside from the intentional diminution of the goddess and its assumption under the power and attitude of the patriarchal God, there are some very stark reversals.

Maybe I will start a thread talking about how Jacob, Achilles and Arjuna all seem to fill a similar role in their respective epics of standing in the middle of a great war, being paralyzed with inaction and undergoing a great internal struggle all at once. Three different versions of this central set of motifs...
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes, it's like when it says "all the earth" was flooded. You have to understand what was
this Bronze Age guy talking about? The "earth" here could have been real earth, as
opposed to the planet as we see it. But the continent rose through the action of water
upon the subduction process - creating the lighter granite. The early earth wasn't just a
water planet, it was also probably as cloud planet, like Titan. Thus it was dark, even though
the sun had to have been present.
If we presume the creation account to be literal I think we miss out, totally ignoring the other points in the OP. For the sake of propping up a fragile windblown belief based upon miracles and hear-say we overlook the defining narratives of peace, conversion from the warlike ways of populism and adoption into a worldwide family.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Another one is Ark and Ark. Noah builds an ark surprisingly analogous to the Ark of the Covenant. Its ark-ark and covenant-covenant. It reminds me of the arky-arky song.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
If we presume the creation account to be literal I think we miss out, totally ignoring the other points in the OP. For the sake of propping up a fragile windblown belief based upon miracles and hear-say we overlook the defining narratives of peace, conversion from the warlike ways of populism and adoption into a worldwide family.

The creation story of God creating a vault of sky between a sandwich of water links to the how the flood happens as described in Genesis 7:11 where water is coming up from and down out of those two layers of water. This sense of being enclosed is, perhaps, also shown in Genesis 31-33 where Jacob definitively escapes from his uncle Laban and his army and then meets Esau's army. Genesis 32 has Jacob waiting alone in the midst of these two armies which threaten to overwhelm him.

Later in Exodus we have Moses trapped between Pharoah's army and the Red Sea...and then God parts the waters...

Clearly one can argue that the way God creates the Universe while superficially resembling the way that the Earth appeared to the story-teller's audience also is used as a motif throughout Genesis (and beyond) as a way to describe a great (?psychological) conflict between two opposing forces.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Harmony of science and religion is an essential principle in my faith and I understand that Catholics talk a very pragmatic and sensible approach too. The fundamentalists who insist on interpreting so much literally are bad look for the Christianity but there are plenty of moderates such as yourself to provide balance and perspective.

Harmony of science and religion is an essential principle in my faith also. To watch as science is beginning to come to terms with that which religious people have believed for thousands of Years, is amazing.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
The creation story of God creating a vault of sky between a sandwich of water links to the how the flood happens as described in Genesis 7:11 where water is coming up from and down out of those two layers of water. This sense of being enclosed is, perhaps, also shown in Genesis 31-33 where Jacob definitively escapes from his uncle Laban and his army and then meets Esau's army. Genesis 32 has Jacob waiting alone in the midst of these two armies which threaten to overwhelm him.

Later in Exodus we have Moses trapped between Pharoah's army and the Red Sea...and then God parts the waters...

Clearly one can argue that the way God creates the Universe while superficially resembling the way that the Earth appeared to the story-teller's audience also is used as a motif throughout Genesis (and beyond) as a way to describe a great (?psychological) conflict between two opposing forces.

This is one scientific theory as to the creation of our solar system some 9 billion years after the creation of those first massive stars that lit up the darkness of the expanding space.

Whether or not a better theory than that which we have today will develop, time will tell.

This theory would appear to support the biblical statement, that the process of the division of the waters above from the waters below, [See Genesis 1: 6; KJV] or the division of the solar nebula cloud from the greater Galactic nebula cloud, began some five billion years ago, and that the whole process began with the division of the water above, from the waters below from which the entire Solar system was created. This took just a few hundred million years, about 400 million years in fact, and the creation of our entire solar system was completed by about 4.6 billion years ago.

It was from the galactic nebular cloud, which was the residue of the heaver elements that were exploded off with the great super nova, which was the death of one of those gigantic earlier generation Stars that our Milky-Way galaxy would be formed in the second creative period=day, as the active universal forces brought about a division of the Solar nebular cloud [The Waters Below] from the Galactic nebular cloud [The Waters Above].

The accretion of the galactic nebula disk, which was being attracted to the central Black Hole around which it had begun to orbit,
transferred angular momentum outward as it transferred mass inward, it was this that caused our solar nebula to begin to rotate and condense inward, bringing a division of the solar cloud, from the galactic cloud, or the waters above from the waters below.

Within the greater galactic nebular cloud, which was slowly beginning to revolve around the Black Hole that anchored it in space,
a piece of the larger cloud complex started to collapse about five billion years ago. The cloud complex had already been "polluted" with dust grains from previous generations of stars, so it was possible to form the rocky terrestrial planets as gravity pulled the gas and dust together, forming a solar nebula. As the cloud=waters of the solar nebula collapsed, its slight rotation increased. This is because of the conservation of angular momentum.

Just like a dancer who spins faster as she pulls in her arms, the cloud began to spin as it collapsed. Eventually, the cloud grew hotter and denser in the centre, with a disk of gas and dust surrounding it that was hot in the centre but cool at the edges. As the disk got thinner and thinner, particles began to stick together and form clumps. Some clumps got bigger, as particles and small clumps stuck to them, eventually forming planets or moons. Genesis 1: 6—9. As the heavenly cloud was gathered together in one place, dry land, or rather planets began to form. Near the centre of the condensing cloud, where planets like earth formed, only rocky material could stand the great heat. Icy matter settled in the outer regions of the disk along with rocky material, where the giant planets like Jupiter formed.

As the cloud continued to fall in, the centre would get so hot that it would eventually become a star and blow away most of the gas and dust from which the planets of the solar system had been formed, with a strong stellar wind.

By studying meteorites, which are thought to be left over from this early phase of the solar system, scientists have found that the solar system is about 4.6 billion years old!
As the solar nebula collapsed, the gas and dust heated up through collisions among the particles. The solar nebula heated up to around 3000 K so everything was in a gaseous form. The solar nebula's composition was similar to the present-day Sun's composition: about 93% hydrogen, 6% helium, and about 1% silicates and iron, and the density of the gas and dust increased toward the core where the proto-sun was: [PROTO SUN.]. The inner, denser regions collapsed more quickly than the outer regions.

Around Jupiter's distance from the proto-Sun the temperature was cool enough to freeze water (the so-called "snow line" or "frost line"). Further out from the proto-Sun, ammonia and methane were able to condense. There was a significant amount of water closer to the Proto-sun, but could not condense. When the solar nebula stopped collapsing it began cooling, though the core that would later form the Sun remained hot.

This meant that the outer parts of the solar nebula cooled off more than the inner parts closer to the hot proto-Sun. Only metal and rock materials could condense (solidify) at the high temperatures close to the proto-Sun. Therefore, the metal and rock materials could condense in all the places where the planets were forming. Volatile materials (like water, methane and ammonia) could only condense in the outer parts of the solar nebula.

Because the density of the solar nebula material increased inward, there was more water at Jupiter's distance than at the distances of Saturn, Uranus, or Neptune. The greater amount of water ice at Jupiter's distance from the proto-Sun helped it grow larger than the other planets. Although, there was more water closer to the proto-Sun than Jupiter, that water was too warm to condense. Material with the highest freezing temperatures condensed to form the chondrules that were then incorporated in lower freezing temperature material.
Chondrules (from Ancient Greek chondros, meaning grain) are round grains found in chondrites. Chondrules form as molten or partially molten droplets in space before being accreted to their parent asteroids.

Any material that later became part of a planet underwent further heating and processing when the planet differentiated so the heavy metals sunk to the planet's core and lighter metals floated up to nearer the surface.

Because of its great compression, the core of the proto-Sun finally reached about 10 million Kelvin and after the planets of the solar system had been created, the hydrogen nuclei started fusing together to produce helium nuclei and a lot of energy.

It was then that the proto-Sun "TURNED ON" and became our Sun, which produced the strong winds called
T-Tauri winds named after the prototype star in the constellation Taurus.

These winds swept out the rest of the nebula that was not already incorporated into the planets. With most of the cocoon gas blown away, the new star itself becomes visible to the outside for the first time. This whole process took just a few hundred million years and was finished by about 4.6 billion years ago. At the distance of about one light year from the earth, is the great icy Dome, that is the boundary of the firmament of our heavens, in which the sun, moon, and planets of our solar system were created.

To be continued.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Continued from previous post.

According to the Genesis narrative, it is on the second day that the Lord calls for a "firmament" to be in the "midst of the waters" to divide the waters:

"And God said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under (or within) the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."
(Genesis 1:6-8 KJV)


The term "firmament" according to the Creation account, is taken from the Hebrew: raqiya` raw-kee'-ah, which is defined by many scholars as an expanse, or the visible arch of the sky:—firmament, but a primitive root; raqa` raw-kah” means, to pound, hammer, to overlay (with thin sheets of metal):—beat, make broad, spread abroad (forth, over, out, into plates), stamp, stretch.


The creation of the firmament is associated with the placement of some sort of structure, and in some modern Bibles many modern scholars translate the Hebrew word raqia as a "dome" or "vault". The Hebrew language appears to imply that the firmament is a firm, fixed structure (FIRMament, which can now be seen as the spherical cloud of comets (Icy vault) in which our solar system was created from the solar nebula cloud that was divided from the greater galactic nebula cloud.


"And God said, “Let there be lights within the firmament=vault to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."
(Genesis 1:14-16 KJV)


This verse says that the Sun, Moon, and Stars=planets of our solar system, are "within" the firmament. Therefore, the waters that are "above the firmament=dome/vault" must be above the Sun, Moon and Stars=planets of our solar system, revealing that the waters which are referred to in Psalms 148:4; "Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that [be] above the heavens," belong to the greater galactic nebula cloud which has become our Milky Way Galaxy.


The Oort cloud, or the Opik-Oort cloud, which is named after Jan Oort, is a spherical cloud that surrounds our solar system, a cloud of predominantly icy objects such as comets that are comprised of mainly hydrogen, oxygen=water, ammonia and methane, and extends up to about a light year from the sun and defines the cosmographical boundary of our Solar System and the region of the suns gravitational dominance. Here is the Firmament, the great spherical vault within which is found the sun, moons and planets of our solar system, the dome of ice above us.


Knowing that the planets of our solar system were already created before the sun came into existence when the hydrogen nuclei within the condensing solar cloud started fusing together to produce helium nuclei and a lot of energy thereby creating our sun, we must now ask the question, “Did life on earth begin to evolve before the creation of the sun?” As is recorded in the Bible. And can life exist without sunlight? Proof of this is to be found in the darkest depths of our oceans, where life has evolved over six miles beneath the surface where sunlight does not and cannot penetrate. This subject will be discussed at a later stage.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, the writers of the bible also wrote about the cruel exile and eventual return of the Jews to Israel.
That nation is there for you to see today. The beginning of that return in 1897 was greeted with derision by most people.
Whoever wrote Genesis said this exile would happen after the Messiah is rejected.

ps the seven days I believe to be symbolic - like much biblical literature. The last mystery, that of whether life came from the land or the sea was agreed upon just this year - life didn't emerge from the sea but the land, or more specifically, the fresh water. All others stages have been verified over the past generation.

For me, Jesus prophecised the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple in the Olivet discourse (Luke 21, Matthew 24). He also prophecised the exile of the Jewish people and their eventual to the Holy land proceeded by His Return. The process of the Return of the Jews began with the signing of the edict of toleration in 1844 which coincided with the birth of the Baha’i Faith.

Edict of Toleration 1844 - Wikipedia

History of the Bahá'í Faith - Wikipedia

It also coincided with the return of the Messiah or Christ the Christians had been expecting.

List of people claimed to be Jesus - Wikipedia

There was great expectations during this time the the return of Christ would come but great disappointment when expectations were not met.

Great Disappointment - Wikipedia

History has a mysterious way of repeating itself and sometimes our prejudices can blind us to the truth.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
It is true the story does not explain this. It seems a thin place in the plot, except Eve is called the mother of all the living. To me it follows in the atory that Cain marries either a half or a full sister - full presuming that she is Adam's. I think that is the gist but not a focal point in the plot.

The symbolism of the story of Noah’s Ark is profound and it’s no coincidence that Christ referred to it during His final sermon near the Mt of Olives (Matthew 24:27). If we remain steadfast in His Mighty Covenant we can withstand the onslaught of tests and difficulties and attain salvation. Our eyes are enabled to see God with our own eyes and view the signs of hope eternal symbolised by the rainbow.

It’s not a literal story and at some point it becomes futile trying to argue the point to those whose eyes are shut to the obvious truth. On the day of the Lord they are not protected from the severe ordeals that must beset us all and in their blindness look towards the wrong places for their protection and salvation.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
...This verse says that the Sun, Moon, and Stars=planets of our solar system, are "within" the firmament. Therefore, the waters that are "above the firmament=dome/vault" must be above the Sun, Moon and Stars=planets of our solar system, revealing that the waters which are referred to in Psalms 148:4; "Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that [be] above the heavens," belong to the greater galactic nebula cloud which has become our Milky Way Galaxy...
I wish to point out that the story when it says firmament is generally taken to be talking about the separation between groundwater plus oceans and rainclouds. Rain falls, and the great deep pushes water upwards in Genesis. The quote seems not non-literal interpretation but rather a redefinition of sky to mean galaxy, and it seems far fetched to me to have to go to such lengths as redefining firmament to refer to the entire galaxy.
 
Top