Can a literal Genesis creation story really hold up?

[outhouse]

I believe I can't refute a supposed prroof that you haven't made. Anyone can say anything and I believe you talk well but you prove nothing.

I believe it is fine to teach it as a theory but if educators are teaching it as fact they are badly mistaken.

So somehow you now more then scientist and professors due to faith and faith alone :biglaugh:

 

[outhouse]

I believe evolution is still only theory despite the stupid people who think otherwise.

I believe stupid people make stupid rules.

No it is fact.

IAP - IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution


We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:

1. In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
2. Since its formation, the Earth – its geology and its environments – has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
3. Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
4. Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin

 

[greentwiga]

I don't see that.

WE have a attested flood on the Euphrates from 2900 BC, exactly where the first mythology sates there was a flood, and when according to Ziusudras possible existence on the kings list.

Israelites did not exist before 1200 BC, and Noahs version was not finished until 500 BC if your lucky, it could have been a little later, but not before.

So we have a 2400 year difference and multiple cultures.


What can you tell me about 2400 years ago that you know in detail, it was the same for them. Think about what your saying. The Israelites are at the half way point between US now! and the actual flood.




There is no evidence that version was in circulation when Israelites existed.







WE have done our homework.


If you know all 3 versions the answer is obvious.

The Sumerian version is the oldest, and closest to the original real flood. The flood it mentions was real, and the man in question is also on the known kings list.


AND if you followed these you would see the oldest version is a river flood and the barge lands next to a hill and a sacrifice was made. As time marches on it goes to a seal deluge, and then to the very late Israelite version as a global flood .


There is no mystery here, just those who have and have not done their homework, and those that want to pervert history and knowledge to meet their biased and apologetic needs. Only by doing the work can you separate who is who.

If you want to propose a hypothesis, you need to be able to explain all 4 versions and the attested flood of 2900 BC with credibility.

Whether you are right about the 500 BC date or I am right about the 1400 BC date, it doesn't matter as far as the Noah story. Both are written way more than a thousand years after the event. Even a Sumerian version written in 2300 BC is 700 years after the event. Logic would say that the one written closest to the event would be closest to accurate. Thus your logic is the best. Still, we don't know if Moses or anyone who wrote the story had access to a version written in 2800 or 2700 BC, and thus be the most accurate. That was my point, though your logic is the best, we can't prove who actually had access to the oldest documents.

The Bible not only says it was a river flood, but that specifically it was a flood plain flood.

 

[outhouse]

Whether you are right about the 500 BC date or I am right about the 1400 BC date, it doesn't matter as far as the Noah story.

Sure it does.

And you have not shown your opinion correct in any way.

What I have stated is not disputed, nor debated.

. Still, we don't know if Moses or anyone who wrote the story had access to a version written in 2800 or 2700 BC, and thus be the most accurate.

Moses doesnt have any historicity at all. He did not describe his own death.

It doesnt matter if any author had access to early traditions.

There was flood mythology in use in most all of these cultures that started with the Sumerian version.

we can't prove who actually had access to the oldest documents.

It was Mesopotamian based though, and a real river flood happened there.


NOW your getting somewhere. If you would like to discover and debate about the Meopotamian influence, I would help you with that. The Israelite version flat states their version came from Mesopotamia.

The Bible not only says it was a river flood, but that specifically it was a flood plain flood.

The OT states it was a global deluge that killed al life on the planet and covered the hihest peek. It was pretty clear the intention of Gods wrath.

It was not a literal piece

 

[Gjallarhorn]

You are rather dogmatic though, or at least attached to a religion, the study of chaos is in relation to overal physics is a science, not necessarily chaos (which just means disorder). Of course you expect something greater, humans are creatures that desire a leader. We aren't loners like other animals. The idea of there not being something greater is frightening.

"Man is a tragic animal. Not because of his smallness, but because he is too well endowed. Man has longings and spiritual demands that reality cannot fulfill. We have expectations of a just and moral world. Man requires meaning in a meaningless world." - Peter Wessel Zapffe

 

[Thief]

You are rather dogmatic though, or at least attached to a religion, the study of chaos is in relation to overal physics is a science, not necessarily chaos (which just means disorder). Of course you expect something greater, humans are creatures that desire a leader. We aren't loners like other animals. The idea of there not being something greater is frightening.

Chaos is order.
The science is new and a bit unwieldy.

You cannot calculate the flight of a dandelion seed.
But if you see one launch it's seed in a stiff breeze...the results are known.
More of the same.

Science relies on predictable results.
Chaos can have that....but the EXACT application of 'petri dish' is elusive.

Likewise this learning device we call....Man.
Each with it's own linear existence ....no two will be the same.

And the results are not so predictable.
Can you crossover...beyond your last breath?
Are you sure?

And will the angels with sword in hand....allow it?

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Chaos is order.
The science is new and a bit unwieldy.

You cannot calculate the flight of a dandelion seed.
But if you see one launch it's seed in a stiff breeze...the results are known.
More of the same.

Science relies on predictable results.
Chaos can have that....but the EXACT application of 'petri dish' is elusive.

Likewise this learning device we call....Man.
Each with it's own linear existence ....no two will be the same.

And the results are not so predictable.
Can you crossover...beyond your last breath?
Are you sure?

And will the angels with sword in hand....allow it?

Chaos is Disorder...not Order...Why do the angels have hands? Why would I want to "cross over" I was given this life, I must do what I can to live it well. What better gift is there than the human condition?

 

[outhouse]

And the results are not so predictable.
Can you crossover...beyond your last breath?

No

A souls is not something proven outside mythology. It was born in mythology, and there is no indication it exist outside it.

Are you sure?

As sure as I am about my computer being able to multiply after being burned to ashes.

It wont.

And will the angels with sword in hand....allow it?

More mythology to explain death?

 

[greentwiga]

If we assume that Israel began when Moses died and Joshua led the invasion against Canaan, then the between Noah disembarking the ark and the Israelites entering Canaan only add up to 846 years, not over a 1000 years....well, according to my calculation using the Masoretic Text.

Yes, by the traditional calculation, but we interpret the years stated in the Bible, by our modern thinking, but they might have meant something else. I think the flood happened about 3050 BC. If you add up the total years, it goes well past 3050 BC. I'm still researching this.

 

[Thief]

Chaos is Disorder...not Order...Why do the angels have hands? Why would I want to "cross over" I was given this life, I must do what I can to live it well. What better gift is there than the human condition?

Eternal life.
Held in spiritual form you are no longer held to the conditions of this life.

Your dreams may well be yours.

So too your nightmares.

Unless of course your afraid to continue?.....live on beyond the last breath....

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Eternal life.
Held in spiritual form you are no longer held to the conditions of this life.

Your dreams may well be yours.

So too your nightmares.

Unless of course your afraid to continue?.....live on beyond the last breath....

If it's a last breath how can I live on? Then it's not my last breath.

Are you afraid that there isn't anything after this last breath? That God created you to enjoy this world and when you did that is it? What better appreciation for a gift than the type that you know you don't have forever. Or are you going to give up the free will you have now simply to continue?

 

[Thief]

If it's a last breath how can I live on? Then it's not my last breath.

Are you afraid that there isn't anything after this last breath? That God created you to enjoy this world and when you did that is it? What better appreciation for a gift than the type that you know you don't have forever. Or are you going to give up the free will you have now simply to continue?

To those who have more shall be given.

I'm expecting an increase.....a real jump.

I might suppose you will be a pile of dust?

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

To those who have more shall be given.

I'm expecting an increase.....a real jump.

I might suppose you will be a pile of dust?

Why would I be a pile of dust because I don't believe your dogma? Tsk...smh

 

[gnostic]

Yes, by the traditional calculation, but we interpret the years stated in the Bible, by our modern thinking, but they might have meant something else. I think the flood happened about 3050 BC. If you add up the total years, it goes well past 3050 BC. I'm still researching this.

But don't you think putting the flood so far back in time (your 3050 BCE), would also put everything else after the flood 600+ years back in time.

Everything indication put Abraham, and Jacob & co in the 1st half of 2nd millennium BCE (so about 1900-1500 BCE). And so would Moses, also be pushed into the late 3rd millennium BCE. David and all the kings that followed, and even the fall of Jerusalem and Exile would happen in the 2nd millennium BCE, not in the 1st half of 1st millennium BCE.

There are only 291 years between the end of Flood (1657 AM) and birth of Abraham (1948 AM).

3050 BCE would mean that Abraham would be born about 2760 BCE and his death would be dated to 2585 BCE. Jacob would have die in Egypt (2255 AM), in 2451 BCE.

It would also mean that Moses didn't lead Israelites out of Egypt till somewhere between 2229 (if you use Abraham's covenant (2047 AM) - Genesis 17) and 2038 BCE (Jacob entering Egypt (2255 AM), Genesis 47:9), depending on when you would put 430 years of Exodus 12:40-41.

You can't expect your dating of the flood (3050 BCE) to not disrupt have timeline of the bible. It would mean that Jesus have born and die in the late 2nd millennium BCE, before the Roman civilisation existed.

And this is just using the Masoretic Text as source, to dating the timeline. I have not used attempted to use any versions of the Septuagint to calculate the timeline. The Masoretic Text put the Flood to 1656 AM, but the Septuagint, varied, depending if you are using the Alexandrinus Codex - 2262 AM - or the Vaticanus Codex - 2242 AM; this is only 20 years difference between Alexandrinus and Vaticanus. And there is 100 years difference between Alexandrinus and Vaticanus with regarding to the birth of Adam. So which version do I use?

I don't have full translations of either Septuagint versions, so I can't really confirm these figures, I have only used critical translation of the Septuagint from NETS (New English Translation of the Septuagint), which used several different versions (including older papyri of the Septuagint), which is more of hinder than helpful when trying to calculate the dates.

 

[Thief]

Why would I be a pile of dust because I don't believe your dogma? Tsk...smh

Well....with the exception of those not in their graves.....
no other exceptions.

But I don't believe in resurrection of the body anyway.

As for you and your stance....
All fine and good as long as you are breathing.
But the day will come and some one will say....dust to dust...
and no one that came to the funeral will make objection for you.

And neither will you.

 

[greentwiga]

But don't you think putting the flood so far back in time (your 3050 BCE), would also put everything else after the flood 600+ years back in time.

Everything indication put Abraham, and Jacob & co in the 1st half of 2nd millennium BCE (so about 1900-1500 BCE). And so would Moses, also be pushed into the late 3rd millennium BCE. David and all the kings that followed, and even the fall of Jerusalem and Exile would happen in the 2nd millennium BCE, not in the 1st half of 1st millennium BCE.

There are only 291 years between the end of Flood (1657 AM) and birth of Abraham (1948 AM).

3050 BCE would mean that Abraham would be born about 2760 BCE and his death would be dated to 2585 BCE. Jacob would have die in Egypt (2255 AM), in 2451 BCE.

It would also mean that Moses didn't lead Israelites out of Egypt till somewhere between 2229 (if you use Abraham's covenant (2047 AM) - Genesis 17) and 2038 BCE (Jacob entering Egypt (2255 AM), Genesis 47:9), depending on when you would put 430 years of Exodus 12:40-41.

You can't expect your dating of the flood (3050 BCE) to not disrupt have timeline of the bible. It would mean that Jesus have born and die in the late 2nd millennium BCE, before the Roman civilisation existed.

And this is just using the Masoretic Text as source, to dating the timeline. I have not used attempted to use any versions of the Septuagint to calculate the timeline. The Masoretic Text put the Flood to 1656 AM, but the Septuagint, varied, depending if you are using the Alexandrinus Codex - 2262 AM - or the Vaticanus Codex - 2242 AM; this is only 20 years difference between Alexandrinus and Vaticanus. And there is 100 years difference between Alexandrinus and Vaticanus with regarding to the birth of Adam. So which version do I use?

I don't have full translations of either Septuagint versions, so I can't really confirm these figures, I have only used critical translation of the Septuagint from NETS (New English Translation of the Septuagint), which used several different versions (including older papyri of the Septuagint), which is more of hinder than helpful when trying to calculate the dates.

No, I date Abraham's birth to be about 1915. I just doubt that we understand what the genealogy from Noah to Abraham meant. I have no proof, but I am researching what are possible meanings. At the moment, I add the total ages to get a maximum, something like 3500 BC. I have no current justification for that. I do a similar treatment for Adam to get a maximum of 13000 BC.

 

[sinzzer]

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.

Old testament has no original source.
It should had been a direct copy of the THorah, but the Thorah dont have the fall of man. The original sin.
The bible in total is one of the biggest fraud in history, organised by the Romans.
They where masters in manipulation and destroyd many civilizations.
And they were responible for the making of the bible.
The story of the jews were used to gave the bible a beginning, and with the bith of jesus every jude must follow Jesus now.
This would end up with the end of Judaism.
But the Romans diddent kil every Jew, and the jews spread the thorah from generation to generation.
If the Romans would kil every jew in that time, we would never had any source for the Old testament and then it would be hard to prove its origine.

But now, you can see the differences between these two books ( thorah, OT )
Genesis got 2 creation storys, thats because two different storys combined in one story.
IN OT the men is cursed by the fall of men, the sin.
In the Thorah humans are pure beings who live in ignorance, knowledge is the key to freedom and kaballa is to help you understand this knowledge.

The messiah in the OT is pointed to Jesus.
In the Thorah the messiah is not the son of God, GOd has not one son.
Every human is his child.
Thats why the Jews dont accept Jesus as his only son.

So the Romans took the story of the jews, change a few things to make it look like its a direc cipy of the Thorah.
Then took the gospels they needed for their new concept of the sin of man.
Copy the gospels and changed what they wanted for the new concept.

In that concept they put the story of Jesus like how they wanted.
How he was born, and how he lived.
And that is almost the same like many other old stories from the past. they simply copy some elements and bind them in one story.

In a smart way they put the jews as the bad guy in his story.
But they made one big mistake.
They want the public to believe that one of his best friends betray him and sold him out for profit.
They also want the public to believe that the Jews wanted him death for blasphemy.
If the Jews wanted to kill Jesus, he would have been stoned to death.
That was the punishment for blasphemy.

And because of Paul concept that every soul must be saved, it was the finishing touch that every person must be turn to a Christian.
The story of the Jews ends with the New testament, this means if you were a jew in that time,you have to follow Jesus now.
You cant follow the bible and end with the OT, the new testament start with the story of Jesus.
So the old law of Mozes doesent count anymore, the new law of Jezus is the law.

This concept of the bible was a smart manipulation move of the Romans to let anyone follow their concept to one leader, the vatican.
With only one purpose, to keep the public in ignorance so they will keep on working as a slave,soldier, working man for the elite.

In those days it would have been normal that people believe what they see or hear, but now with internet and all the knowledge outside, you should think twice before you believe what the past wanted you to believe.

Because of this Roman fraud on humanity, it leaded to corruption, slavery, wars, violence against womans because they see them as the fault of creation because they eat the fruit!!
Many idiots in history used that story to support fighting withcraft.
Our history should have been different if leaders diddent use knowledge to slave humanity.
Thats why i saw the crimes what the Romans did might be the biggest against humanity.
The mistakes what they made in the OT would not have seen if their was no jews around, to tell the real story.
But now its a matter of time before people put every cards of history on the table, to see what is wright and who is wrong.
I did that already, and thats why i know for sure the bible is a Roman masterpiece fraud!!

And its easy to prove it, the concept of the bible dont got any source beside the bible.
The only facts about the bible are that its a book made in a time of the Romans and by the Romans.
This means the ROmans made it how the want the book to be.
Its just a smart move to let everyone in their empire follow one religion and all pointed to the vatican.

 

[CG Didymus]

...In that concept they put the story of Jesus like how they wanted.
How he was born, and how he lived...

Thanks for the post and welcome to the forum. Most any religion can make people better, but it can also be abused by those in power to control people. The fundamentalists of any religion have a good side and a bad side. The good ones, I'm sure, mean well and believe they have the only truth that can "save" us, but is their "truth" based on facts? To them yes, their particular holy book that is proclaimed, by them, to be factual. A fundy Christian literal interpretation of Genesis is extremely hard to accept as historical and spiritual truth. They need it for their religion, and they need to come up with ways to prove it's the truth to the rest of the world. It is a difficult, if not impossible task. 6 literal days of creation, a young Earth, a world-wide flood, all of it, how does anybody prove any of that is the literal, factual truth? Yet, they need to, to make Jesus true also. Unfortunately, the fundy Jesus and the fundy God aren't that appealing. It's one way, one truth or else. Everybody else and their religion is wrong, even other Christians that don't believe like them, are wrong.

Anyway, I hope you have more to add to this thread. Thanks again.

 

[gnostic]

I will reply to you in reverse order - with your last being replied first.

I do a similar treatment for Adam to get a maximum of 13000 BC.

How do you get this figure of "13,000 years"?

Meaning, what or whose is your source(s)?

I know that some groups of young earth creationists believe that the 6-day creation, began about 6000 years ago (or about 4000 BCE), while others believed that it began 13,000 years ago, because of 2 Peter 3:8 (so each day in Genesis 1 amount to a period (or "Age") of a thousand years).

I think mixing the verse 2 Peter 3:8 with Genesis 1, bring even illogical problems.

But you are saying that Adam was created 13,000 years ago...well, at least that what I think you are saying, not that the 1st Light was created (ie 1st Day) in 13,000 years. So I'd have to ask for your sources?

No, I date Abraham's birth to be about 1915.

So you are saying that a gap of 1135 years between the time Noah boarded the Ark and the birth of Abraham.

Most English translations of the OT bible are based on the Masoretic Text (MT). Only those followed Greek or Eastern Orthodox churches followed the OT Septuagint. And judging by the 2 main versions or editions of the Septuagint, this gap (flood to Abraham's birth) is about 1072 years (Codex Alexanrinus) or 1172 years (Codex Vaticanus).

So again, I would have to ask for your source(s).

 

[sinzzer]

Thanks for the post and welcome to the forum.

Anyway, I hope you have more to add to this thread. Thanks again.

Hello and thank you,
The problem i think is the ignorance about the power of believing.
If you underestimate this power, you can believe anything and hold it as the truth.
When you understand you could believe anything you see of hear, then you understand it would be wiser to investigate what you see of hear before you believe it.
And thats why many religion followers never fought their spirital battle and then they stay prison in their own minds.
Because they see there own religion as the truth.

The spirital battle starts when someone is forced to look at the facts of his own religion.
And after you see some facts, then you cant denied the truth.
its like wake up out of a bad dream.
Only problem is many will fight til death to keep dreaming.