• 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?

CG Didymus

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
So many things don't add up in Genesis. Like the Sun and stars, not only were they created after the Earth, but created after plants? But then, I was wondering; Adam gets kicked out of Eden and has to till the soil? This is based on Gen 4:23 and 4:2 where Adam is sent out to "cultivate" the ground and his son Cain was a "tiller" of the ground. What did they till it with? Did God make them a plow and a hoe or something? And then Abel, why was he keeping flocks? Weren't they vegetarians? Was it for wool? Did God make Eve a loom and Abel some shears?

I see Genesis as religious poetry, but some Christians, and I guess some Jews, see it as literal. Ken Ham on his TV show Answers in Genesis, insists that it must be taken literal, that it is foundational, without it the whole of the Bible falls. What do you think.
 
nazz

nazz

Doubting Thomas
I see it as myth and that fact has no effect on my faith. But I do understand if a person holds to certain doctrines it not being literally historic could be a problem for them.
 
fallingblood

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
CG Didymus said:
So many things don't add up in Genesis. Like the Sun and stars, not only were they created after the Earth, but created after plants? But then, I was wondering; Adam gets kicked out of Eden and has to till the soil? This is based on Gen 4:23 and 4:2 where Adam is sent out to "cultivate" the ground and his son Cain was a "tiller" of the ground. What did they till it with? Did God make them a plow and a hoe or something? And then Abel, why was he keeping flocks? Weren't they vegetarians? Was it for wool? Did God make Eve a loom and Abel some shears?

I see Genesis as religious poetry, but some Christians, and I guess some Jews, see it as literal. Ken Ham on his TV show Answers in Genesis, insists that it must be taken literal, that it is foundational, without it the whole of the Bible falls. What do you think.
Click to expand...
I don't know why the whole Bible would fail without it. The creation story really isn't foundational at all. For Christianity, the death and resurrection of Jesus are the foundational ideas.

I think taking the story literally, or as simply myth (as in the modern view that it is just wrong, or some nice story) is wrong. It takes away the actual meaning of the story, which is quite wonderful.
 
D

Dinner123

Member
CG Didymus said:
So many things don't add up in Genesis. Like the Sun and stars, not only were they created after the Earth, but created after plants? But then, I was wondering; Adam gets kicked out of Eden and has to till the soil? This is based on Gen 4:23 and 4:2 where Adam is sent out to "cultivate" the ground and his son Cain was a "tiller" of the ground. What did they till it with? Did God make them a plow and a hoe or something? And then Abel, why was he keeping flocks? Weren't they vegetarians? Was it for wool? Did God make Eve a loom and Abel some shears?

I see Genesis as religious poetry, but some Christians, and I guess some Jews, see it as literal. Ken Ham on his TV show Answers in Genesis, insists that it must be taken literal, that it is foundational, without it the whole of the Bible falls. What do you think.
Click to expand...

They could till the soil with a stick for all I know. The native Americans used a sharpen stick. They would poke the ground drop some seeds in it. That Hebrew root word just means "to serve" so to till the ground was to serve it.
Well where does the Bible say they were vegetarians? It doesn't. They could use the fleeces at this time for clothing; assuming they did not know how to make wool at first. They also needed sacrifices.
As for what God gave them. We don't know other than two pairs of clothing made from animal skins. But, since we see that He gave them this then He could give them other things as well.
I believe Genesis is absolutely foundational.
 
james2ko

james2ko

Well-Known Member
CG Didymus said:
So many things don't add up in Genesis. Like the Sun and stars, not only were they created after the Earth, but created after plants? But then, I was wondering; Adam gets kicked out of Eden and has to till the soil? This is based on Gen 4:23 and 4:2 where Adam is sent out to "cultivate" the ground and his son Cain was a "tiller" of the ground. What did they till it with? Did God make them a plow and a hoe or something? And then Abel, why was he keeping flocks? Weren't they vegetarians? Was it for wool? Did God make Eve a loom and Abel some shears?

I see Genesis as religious poetry, but some Christians, and I guess some Jews, see it as literal. Ken Ham on his TV show Answers in Genesis, insists that it must be taken literal, that it is foundational, without it the whole of the Bible falls. What do you think.
Click to expand...

The sun and stars were created in Gen 1:1-perhaps billions of years prior to verse 2. (in the Masoretic text there is a mark called a rhebia after verse 1 indicating a disjunctive pause before verse 2). The sun and stars were already in orbit prior to the commencement of Gen 1:2. If the sun were not in orbit, verse two would have read, "...and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the "ice" [qerach-קרח].
 
nazz

nazz

Doubting Thomas
james2ko said:
The sun and stars were created in Gen 1:1-perhaps billions of years prior to verse 2. (in the Masoretic text there is a mark called a rhebia after verse 1 indicating a disjunctive pause before verse 2). The sun and stars were already in orbit prior to the commencement of Gen 1:2. If the sun were not in orbit, verse two would have read, "...and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the "ice" [qerach-קרח].
Click to expand...

The text speaks of the creation of the sun, moon, and stars in verse 14.
 
Jayhawker Soule

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
james2ko said:
Fair enough. Got any biblical evidence to prove "asah" can never mean "appointed" or "set"?
Click to expand...
That is a pathetically childish question and an even more pathetic attempt to transfer the burden of proof. If and when you can provide scholarship supporting your idiosyncratic and self-serving rendering of Genesis, feel free to do so.
 
james2ko

james2ko

Well-Known Member
Jayhawker Soule said:
That is a pathetically childish question and an even more pathetic attempt to transfer the burden of proof. If and when you can provide scholarship supporting your idiosyncratic and self-serving rendering of Genesis, feel free to do so.
Click to expand...

I didn't think so. I'm sure someone will appreciate the intellectually charged, pompously phrenic "no" . ;)
 
idav

idav

Being
Premium Member
CG Didymus said:
I see Genesis as religious poetry, but some Christians, and I guess some Jews, see it as literal. Ken Ham on his TV show Answers in Genesis, insists that it must be taken literal, that it is foundational, without it the whole of the Bible falls. What do you think.
Click to expand...
Genesis can easily be seen as a history of mankind as we evolved advanced and became a society. It can be seen as foundational since it sets the relationship between man and god, man being somewhat at an elevated status which got them kicked out of paradise. The whole of the bible is mankind trying to return to the paradise that was lost since the beginning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top