Can a literal Genesis creation story really hold up?

[Enai de a lukal]

It is embarrassing that your using scholarships from the 1800's as proof some things are credible.

Yes it is factual that with time we can learn more of what is mythology and what is not.

But many aspects in the NT are mythological in nature and that is factual.

And some of the parts that are factual are simply factually incorrect (e.g. the claim that Christ was born in the year of a census AND under the reign of Herod)

 

[CG Didymus]

...Because it is impossible to have 2 people start a breeding population IMPOSSIBLE ...

I wonder if Eve had kids that resembled her and Adam, or if they were all varied? But then God does it again with Noah. At least then he had four couples to work with. But not with most of the animals. There was only one pair. And, some Christians narrow it down even more by saying that "kinds" meant that, for example, all dog-like animals came from one pair of let's say wolves. From them came foxes, dogs, coyotes, etc? Now that's some creative breeding.

 

[Benoni]

Why cant it be mythology to teach moral lessons through metaphor, poem, and allegory?


Because it is impossible to have 2 people start a breeding population IMPOSSIBLE

Does it really matter if it was a metaphor, poem, and allegory; I do not like the word mythology but I do understand where you are coming from.

I mean you are looking for hard physical proof which you will never get and if you did it would mean nothing to me or anyone else who understands the deepness of God's Word.

You say "it is impossible to have 2 people start a breeding population".

That’s true now.

Adam and Eve were not normal people. Before the fall they knew no death, walked with God, spoke to God in the cool (spirit) of the day Adam live to be physically 930 years old even after Adam experience spiritual death.

So to say it these people it is impossible start a breeding population; I say you are wrong under the circumstance I just mentioned and more.

 

[Benoni]

You cannot get people to jump through the metal hoops required for a literal interpretation to have any credibility and absolutely no validity

I do not expect people to. God hides this deep mysteries where the vast majority of His people will not see now. I am not a scriptural literalist and it amazes me how many literal verses I post and many of my religious brothers cannot step out of their old wine skins when the literal proof is right in front of them. Then you have the rest of the world of unbelievers and they cannot see

 

[rusra02]

It is embarrassing that your using scholarships from the 1800's as proof some things are credible.

Yes it is factual that with time we can learn more of what is mythology and what is not.

But many aspects in the NT are mythological in nature and that is factual.

It appears you are ready to label anything in the Bible not corroborated by archeology as myth. Making unfounded assertions that parts of the Bible are myths merely betrays your bias, IMO.

 

[outhouse]

It appears you are ready to label anything in the Bible not corroborated by archeology as myth. Making unfounded assertions that parts of the Bible are myths merely betrays your bias, IMO.

That is just your false understanding of what I stated.


Much of the first 5 books were never intended to be literal or factual accounts.


They were to teach important lessons to a later cultures as these collections of text were redacted to a later time period.

To date there was no exodus, flood, noah, moses or adam and eve. They have no historicity at all and no historian is searching to try and find any.

They reflect certain traditions needed at a ce4rtain time period, not history in any sense.



Humans factually evolved, the earth is old, and Israelites did not exist prior to 1200 BC, and they evolved from displaced Canaanites.

 

[Ouroboros]

And some of the parts that are factual are simply factually incorrect (e.g. the claim that Christ was born in the year of a census AND under the reign of Herod)

Unless...

Jesus is the Doctor, Doctor Who.

 

[outhouse]

Adam and Eve were not normal people.

Nonsesne

Mesopotamians before Israelites even existed had similar mythology.

Their first man was Adamu, we know these legends were handed down and used as mythology.


Israelites did not exist before 1200 BC, the adam and eve legend grew with time.It was not written in one time period. Israelites did not even know their own herritage or origins let alone be able to trace it back to 2 people. It factually did not happen that way, per Israel Finklestein Israels best archeologist.

 

[outhouse]

God hides this deep mysteries where the vast majority of His people will not see now.

False. Circular thinking inbeded in the bible to support its self proclaimed authority.


No god wrote any part of the bible. Most of it was people who collected writings and compiled them together to meet the cultural needs of the time of compilation, not the original time of authorship.

The bible was written by man for man, it does not get any deeper then that. The original authors knew how to read te bible [not literally] that is why they left contradictions and the obvious compilatios of earlier text, because historical accuracy was not important.

A literal view only ruins the REAL BEAUTY and steals from the moral lessons that are important.

 

[sojourner]

It appears you are ready to label anything in the Bible not corroborated by archeology as myth.

That's a responsible beginning point for applying that label.

Making unfounded assertions that parts of the Bible are myths merely betrays your bias, IMO.

The archaeological record isn't "unfounded." But your assertion that the bible isn't mythic is wholly unfounded.

 

[rusra02]

That is just your false understanding of what I stated.


Much of the first 5 books were never intended to be literal or factual accounts.


They were to teach important lessons to a later cultures as these collections of text were redacted to a later time period.

To date there was no exodus, flood, noah, moses or adam and eve. They have no historicity at all and no historian is searching to try and find any.

They reflect certain traditions needed at a ce4rtain time period, not history in any sense.



Humans factually evolved, the earth is old, and Israelites did not exist prior to 1200 BC, and they evolved from displaced Canaanites.

You are making more unfounded and unsubstantiated claims, IMO.

 

[rusra02]

That's a responsible beginning point for applying that label.
The archaeological record isn't "unfounded." But your assertion that the bible isn't mythic is wholly unfounded.

Which archeological record? That which supports the historicity and truthfulness of many accounts in the Bible? And do I understand that your view is "If archeology cannot confirm something happened, we must assume it is myth?" Really?

 

[gnostic]

Adam and Eve were not normal people. Before the fall they knew no death, walked with God, spoke to God in the cool (spirit) of the day Adam live to be physically 930 years old even after Adam experience spiritual death.

The whole "spiritual death" is nothing more than a modern Christian propaganda or modern Christian interpretation to explain away why Adam and Eve didn't die on the every day as God said they were suppose to die when they ate the fruit.

 

[Benoni]

The whole "spiritual death" is nothing more than a modern Christian propaganda or modern Christian interpretation to explain away why Adam and Eve didn't die on the every day as God said they were suppose to die when they ate the fruit.

No it death is actually written thoughtout the Bible, it one of those hidden spiritual patterns most Christians do not see, and you do not see. Death is why we are here, Jesus death was preordained before Adam was created, death is why you cannot believe in God for you are dead in trustpasses and sins.

 

[outhouse]

You are making more unfounded and unsubstantiated claims, IMO.

:biglaugh:


Yes and of course you can back that with something else besides unsubstantiated personal opinion

 

[outhouse]

Which archeological record? That which supports the historicity and truthfulness of many accounts in the Bible?

Some parts it does not

Other parts, it shines a light of truth that goes against what was written

You know the record that shows much of the bible was allegorical, metaphorical and mythological. :yes:

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Which archeological record? That which supports the historicity and truthfulness of many accounts in the Bible? And do I understand that your view is "If archeology cannot confirm something happened, we must assume it is myth?" Really?

"Historicity and truthfulness?" You mean like saying that it is somehow possible to fit 8 people, 17,400 birds, 12,000 reptiles, 9,000 mammals, 5,000 amphibians, 2,000,000 insects, and a year's supply of food and water, on a boat that is only 450 feet long?

 

[sojourner]

Which archeological record? That which supports the historicity and truthfulness of many accounts in the Bible? And do I understand that your view is "If archeology cannot confirm something happened, we must assume it is myth?" Really?

There is one archaeological record. It is used as one way to confirm the factual history of something -- not as the only way. If it doesn't exist in the archaeological record, then we look at other things. But lack of record is a HUGE strike against its historical factuality.

 

[CG Didymus]

"Historicity and truthfulness?" You mean like saying that it is somehow possible to fit 8 people, 17,400 birds, 12,000 reptiles, 9,000 mammals, 5,000 amphibians, 2,000,000 insects, and a year's supply of food and water, on a boat that is only 450 feet long?

You forget that God helped Noah. He could have easily shrunk the animals or not let them get hungry for a year, or, fed them animal manna. Plus, you're forgetting the miracle of holding a 450' wooden boat together without leaking. All proof that God can do anything.

But really now, if humans lived 900 plus years, what about the rodents? ( not to mention the insects and bacteria and fish) How many mice were on the planet? After all, there's some that think that even the animals were not allowed to eat meat in the beginning. So with no predators, what do you think? Maybe 100 or 200 year old mice that had like a billion babies? They must have been everywhere. Obviously, we must have piles and piles of bones from this time period. It was only 4000 to 6000 years ago. It must show substantial differences in structure and bone density wouldn't it. Oh, and those bones of the giants, the Nephilim. I saw their pictures on Youtube. What was there DNA like? Half human, half "sons of God"? They have run tests on them haven't they?

 

[Benoni]

You forget that God helped Noah. He could have easily shrunk the animals or not let them get hungry for a year, or, fed them animal manna. Plus, you're forgetting the miracle of holding a 450' wooden boat together without leaking. All proof that God can do anything.

But really now, if humans lived 900 plus years, what about the rodents? ( not to mention the insects and bacteria and fish) How many mice were on the planet? After all, there's some that think that even the animals were not allowed to eat meat in the beginning. So with no predators, what do you think? Maybe 100 or 200 year old mice that had like a billion babies? They must have been everywhere. Obviously, we must have piles and piles of bones from this time period. It was only 4000 to 6000 years ago. It must show substantial differences in structure and bone density wouldn't it. Oh, and those bones of the giants, the Nephilim. I saw their pictures on Youtube. What was there DNA like? Half human, half "sons of God"? They have run tests on them haven't they?

When I see the long years in Genesis I look at it as Adam and Eve had a very close relationship with God for they walked and talked with God in the cool (spirit) of the day. I am sure they passed this on to others who came after them . I see God's glory still having a Hugh influnce on their loves, thus the long lives