Are Religious Explanations Always Facile?

[sojourner]

"God created".

It does not say god assembled.

You too are interpreting / assuming just as much as anyone else.


Edit :
Create : bring (something) into existence.

I may create a work of art, but the raw materials are already there to be formed and structured.

 

[sojourner]

Do you actually know any christians?

1) I didn’t say you were the only one
2) Christians are neither perfect nor, in most cases, biblical scholars
3) Christians are not automatically authorities on the Bible

 

[ChristineM]

I may create a work of art, but the raw materials are already there to be formed and structured.

Where does the OT say there were materials available?

You are simply doing what so many others to and making up genesis to suite your own belief

 

[ChristineM]

1) I didn’t say you were the only one
2) Christians are neither perfect nor, in most cases, biblical scholars
3) Christians are not automatically authorities on the Bible

You got that right

 

[Windwalker]

Where does the OT say there were materials available?

You are simply doing what so many others to and making up genesis to suite your own belief

I'll let Sojourner answer from his knowledge base, but I think part of the answer to that, is that when you read the text, it says following the statement that God created the heavens and the earth in verse 1, describing how in the following verses beginning with verse 2:

Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.​

What you see here is a formless, unshaped, unmolded raw materials of something already there which God then took and fashioned in the following verses by separating light and dark, water and land, etc. It was then upon this prepared creation, that God populated it with various creatures, cultimaning in the creation of humans.

Now, outside the Bible, historically speaking, it was not until the 10th century A.D., that an ex-nihlo creation was proposed. Prior to that time, everyone believed in creation from pre-existing matter. From the Wiki article on just that:

Saadia Gaon introduced ex nihilo creation into the readings of the Jewish bible in the 10th century CE in his work Book of Beliefs and Opinions where he imagines a God far more awesome and omnipotent than that of the rabbis, the traditional Jewish teachers who had so far dominated Judaism, whose God created the world from pre-existing matter.[29] Today Jews, like Christians, tend to believe in creation ex nihilo, although some Jewish scholars recognise that Genesis 1:1 recognises the pre-existence of matter to which God gives form.[30]​

Creatio ex nihilo - Wikipedia

 

[ChristineM]

I'll let Sojourner answer from his knowledge base, but I think part of the answer to that, is that when you read the text, it says following the statement that God created the heavens and the earth in verse 1, describing how in the following verses beginning with verse 2:

Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.​

What you see here is a formless, unshaped, unmolded raw materials of something already there which God then took and fashioned in the following verses by separating light and dark, water and land, etc. It was then upon this prepared creation, that God populated it with various creatures, cultimaning in the creation of humans.

Now, outside the Bible, historically speaking, it was not until the 10th century A.D., that an ex-nihlo creation was proposed. Prior to that time, everyone believed in creation from pre-existing matter. From the Wiki article on just that:

Saadia Gaon introduced ex nihilo creation into the readings of the Jewish bible in the 10th century CE in his work Book of Beliefs and Opinions where he imagines a God far more awesome and omnipotent than that of the rabbis, the traditional Jewish teachers who had so far dominated Judaism, whose God created the world from pre-existing matter.[29] Today Jews, like Christians, tend to believe in creation ex nihilo, although some Jewish scholars recognise that Genesis 1:1 recognises the pre-existence of matter to which God gives form.[30]​

Creatio ex nihilo - Wikipedia

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Unless you have a time machine you cannot form the earth before creating it.

Before the 10th century was the exclusive domain of priests and up.

 

[Windwalker]

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Unless you have a time machine you cannot form the earth before creating it.

Before the 10th century was the exclusive domain of priests and up.

But that was the point. It's how they believed historically. It doesn't matter if it's scientific or not. That's a 2021 perspective, where modern science has been part of our lives for the past 300 years. They didn't have that perspective we do back then, because modern science was not born yet.

That's the point of this. We cannot read into the texts modern understandings. Ancient peoples would have no understanding of the way we look at things. If you want to understand what they thought, when they wrote it, then you have to strip away those modern perspectives.

Could anyone reasonably believe Jesus and the disciples for instance, would understand the concepts of modern forms of transportation, such as trains, planes, and automobiles? Horseless chariots, would be inconceivable to them.

Nothing they would write, could possibly be considered as them having had that in their minds. Yet, more than a few preachers and lay people read the bible like that. That does not translate therefore into, that is what the bible actually says, just because they lazily imagine it does.

 

[ChristineM]

But that was the point. It's how they believed historically. It doesn't matter if it's scientific or not. That's a 2021 perspective, where modern science has been part of our lives for the past 300 years. They didn't have that perspective we do back then, because modern science was not born yet.

That's the point of this. We cannot read into the texts modern understandings. Ancient peoples would have no understanding of the way we look at things. If you want to understand what they thought, when they wrote it, then you have to strip away those modern perspectives. Could anyone reasonably believe Jesus and the disciples for instance, would understand the concepts of air travel?

The point is verse 1 comes before verse 2 and what has science to do with it?

Do you have evidence that they read the bible differently in historical times?

I would think an ancient in awe of his god would believe anything, i.e. genesis 1 states his god created heaven and earth, it doesn't list components so would he assume his god made it from nothing or from existing components ikea style.

 

[Onoma]

I think he's a pompous twit that severely over-estimates his own education . He's another academic talking head that battles zealots in debates that are based on literalism and false dichotomies to begin with, which is like kicking a midget and acting like you just beat up a giant

I'd punish this fool in a real debate because he clearly knows nothing about classical Mesopotamian or Egyptian literature, so his ideas about religion are ultracrepidarian at best

 

[ChristineM]

I think he's a pompous twit that severely over-estimates his own education . He's another academic talking head that battles zealots in debates that are based on literalism and false dichotomies to begin with, which is like kicking a midget and acting like you just beat up a giant

I'd punish this fool in a real debate because he clearly knows nothing about classical Mesopotamian or Egyptian literature, so his ideas about religion are ultracrepidarian at best

You don't like him then?

 

[Windwalker]

Do you have evidence that they read the bible differently in historical times?

I presented that already in the Wiki article I linked to, and quoted from. Additionally, just on a reasonable, rational level alone, how could they possibly understand the world in terms of modern science, when it was not born yet, coming into existence only in the 17th century C.E., 300 years ago? Can you explain how that would be possible?

Again, you asked for evidence they didn't believe in an ex-nihlo creation, and I provided it to you. Here it is again for you to read yourself:

Creatio ex nihilo - Wikipedia

Saadia Gaon introduced ex nihilo creation into the readings of the Jewish bible in the 10th century CE in his work Book of Beliefs and Opinions where he imagines a God far more awesome and omnipotent than that of the rabbis, the traditional Jewish teachers who had so far dominated Judaism, whose God created the world from pre-existing matter.[29] Today Jews, like Christians, tend to believe in creation ex nihilo, although some Jewish scholars recognise that Genesis 1:1 recognises the pre-existence of matter to which God gives form.[30]
​

Do you have doubts about this?

 

[ChristineM]

I presented that already in the Wiki article I linked to, and quoted from. Additionally, just on a reasonable, rational level alone, how could they possibly understand the world in terms of modern science, when it was not born yet, coming into existence only in the 17th century C.E., 300 years ago? Can you explain how that would be possible?

Again, you asked for evidence they didn't believe in an ex-nihlo creation, and I provided it to you. Here it is again for you to read yourself:

Creatio ex nihilo - Wikipedia

Saadia Gaon introduced ex nihilo creation into the readings of the Jewish bible in the 10th century CE in his work Book of Beliefs and Opinions where he imagines a God far more awesome and omnipotent than that of the rabbis, the traditional Jewish teachers who had so far dominated Judaism, whose God created the world from pre-existing matter.[29] Today Jews, like Christians, tend to believe in creation ex nihilo, although some Jewish scholars recognise that Genesis 1:1 recognises the pre-existence of matter to which God gives form.[30]
​

Do you have doubts about this?

Wiki is not evidence, it is essentially an open forum were any anonymous person can post their own views on line and many people think it's credible. Here s the revision history of the page you linked

Page history - Wikipedia

I am not asking about the 10th century, that is your strawman. How about those people i described, living at the time of supposed authorship?

 

[sojourner]

Where does the OT say there were materials available?

You are simply doing what so many others to and making up genesis to suite your own belief

Nope. The Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters. Sorry: I’ve spent years doing graduate study in the Bible and professionally exegeting texts. I think I know what I’m doing. I know the difference between how to read what’s there and what consists of lazy reading or wishful thinking.

 

[sojourner]

You got that right

Then there are Bible scholars... mostly Christian, or Jewish — some not. And we are authorities.

The point is verse 1 comes before verse 2 and what has science to do with it?

The point is that the texts originally were not divided up into verses — or even paragraphs and sentences. And there were no vowels.

 

[Windwalker]

Wiki is not evidence, it is essentially an open forum were any anonymous person can post their own views on line and many people think it's credible. Here s the revision history of the page you linked

Page history - Wikipedia

I am not asking about the 10th century, that is your strawman. How about those people i described, living at the time of supposed authorship?

Seriously? Why bother with scholarship then? The world of alternative facts is vogue now, it seems. Experts and specialists are just another opinion, no better than anyone else's, it's believed by many to be true to their own ends.

 

[Windwalker]

Nope. The Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters. Sorry: I’ve spent years doing graduate study in the Bible and professionally exegeting texts. I think I know what I’m doing. I know the difference between how to read what’s there and what consists of lazy reading or wishful thinking.

Yeah... but where's your evidence? Were you there?

 

[thomas t]

Ok, you reject science then. Take everything I said about you "fighting" science, and replace it with the word "rejecting", which you just admitted you do.

Yeah, I reject science sometimes.... like I reject a glass of water sometimes... but wait..

When you "reject" science, when Christians make it a choice between belief and faith in God and rejecting science, as opposed to accepting science and rejecting God, they are the ones directly responsible for the mass exodus into atheism. And it is all completely unnecessary.

I was hoping you'd be willing to discuss that with me. I still am. Can you discuss that with me, please?

now again, I hear a reproach.
Since the discussion involves too many reproaches - reproaches without appropriate sourcing - I'll limit the discussion with you to this very point.
If you go ahead and reproach people like me for the mass exodus from Christianity... then the onus is on you to give evidence.
Cite a source from an atheist saying that he or she left faith because he learned that there were some people around like me who, whenever they believe something to be the case in spite of science claiming otherwise.... give priority to the Bible as opposed to science in what they believe at some instances.
This is the kind of substantiation that is missing.

I hate when I am getting accused of something without being given appopriate documentation (soucing) of what my actions leads to.

I find this debate we're angaging in is getting too aggressive.

We discuss this one point and then debate finished.

 

[ChristineM]

Nope. The Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters. Sorry: I’ve spent years doing graduate study in the Bible and professionally exegeting texts. I think I know what I’m doing. I know the difference between how to read what’s there and what consists of lazy reading or wishful thinking.

Then i suggest you re read the first verse.

Genesis 1
King James Version

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

 

[sojourner]

Yeah... but where's your evidence? Were you there?

Yeah. I know.

 

[ChristineM]

Then there are Bible scholars... mostly Christian, or Jewish — some not. And we are authorities.

The point is that the texts originally were not divided up into verses — or even paragraphs and sentences. And there were no vowels.

So not numbered, not sentenced, are you saying ..

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.


With or without a verse number or full stops is not the first few words of genesis?