Can a literal Genesis creation story really hold up?

[outhouse]

Still, it is interesting that the Bible preserves the exact location of the domestication of most of the founder crops exactly where scientists say they were domesticated.

No they do not.

Its one of many areas.

Israelites knew nothing if prehistory.

They were however influenced by Mesopotamians during the exile, this is where much influence comes.

And the Babylonians were much more advanced then Israelites, and they had no clue about prehistory either.


Gobleki tepe was one of many that started agriculture. But one cannot label it the starting point either, just like you want to play with Karsag, which is not Edens location.

 

[ScuzManiac]

You could ask a question in an attempt to lead the discussion.
I do so quite often.

But many people do so hoping to corner the opponent (as in debate)
That would be intellectual dishonesty.

When I lead with a question I do so knowing the answer in advance....
and knowing the answer will be more to point.

For example.....which came first Spirit or substance?
The answer leads to consequence, which I hold as firm.

Creation?....with Spirit first?....of course.
Man as creation?......yeah.
Man as an altered creature, taken from the rest of the animal kingdom?.....yeah.

We ARE that creature wanting to know.....even as death is pending.

Or could you quit ducking the hard questions in a debate forum....

And keep your mindless rants to yourself.

 

[bird]

[QUOTE If it is, it is mythology set in history. The background of the story is clearly the point and location of the domestication of plants. (Adam was the first farmer.) The events show a battle between the worship of the mother goddess and the God of the Bible. I could understand someone claiming that this part of the story was mythology. Never-the-less, the background is historically accurate.][/QUOTE]

Seems like so often I see programs on the History Channel about history that was based on a surface reading of the Bible. The thing is, the Bible is written as a parable (Psalm 78:2). It is easy to glance at Genesis and think, as you did, Adam was the first farmer. However, plants are really parable pictures of people in Genesis. It may come as a surprise, but God plants believers:"Also I will ordain a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, and they shall dwell in their place, and shall be moved no more; neither shall the children of wickedness waste them any more, as at the beginning" (1 Chron 17:9) In Mark 8:24: "And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking". Indeed, the garden which God planted in Genesis is a picture of the true believers, God's bride, so to speak. "A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse". (Song of Songs 4:12) The tree of life in the midst is Christ. Indeed, Adam is a picture of Christ and Eve of the true believers, Christ's spouse. The real meaning is not so much surface history as a picture of groups long events and so forth.

 

[Thief]

Or could you quit ducking the hard questions in a debate forum....

And keep your mindless rants to yourself.

I think I'm doing just fine.
I get frubals.....so there are others that agree.

 

[ScuzManiac]

I think I'm doing just fine.
I get frubals.....so there are others that agree.

I'd hope so.

You've been a member for 4 years.

If we want to go that route...

At the current rate, I'd have more than you in a year and a half.

 

[Thief]

I'd hope so.

You've been a member for 4 years.

If we want to go that route...

At the current rate, I'd have more than you in a year and a half.

There was a revamp of the frubal system sometime ago.

Under the old method you might have caught up.

On the other hand.....
I make it difficult for nay sayers to say ...'nay'.

I say...Genesis works just fine as is.

 

[ScuzManiac]

There was a revamp of the frubal system sometime ago.

Under the old method you might have caught up.

On the other hand.....
I make it difficult for nay sayers to say ...'nay'.

I say...Genesis works just fine as is.

Really?

I haven't seen where ANYONE has any difficulty saying "nay."

And Genesis? Really?

Talking snakes? Inconsistencies? Woman made from the rib of man?

Definitely works fine....for people who want an easy answer.

 

[Thief]

Really?

I haven't seen where ANYONE has any difficulty saying "nay."

And Genesis? Really?

Talking snakes? Inconsistencies? Woman made from the rib of man?

Definitely works fine....for people who want an easy answer.

You have read my postings in this thread.....right?

 

[ScuzManiac]

You have read my postings in this thread.....right?

Yep.

And apparently 3-4 people have you on ignore in this thread alone...

But that's because you proved them wrong, right?

 

[`mud]

hey Scuz,
Can you read circularly ?
~
'mud

 

[Thief]

Yep.

And apparently 3-4 people have you on ignore in this thread alone...

But that's because you proved them wrong, right?

Apparently so.

Care to give it a go?

 

[Ouroboros]

Still, it is interesting that the Bible preserves the exact location of the domestication of most of the founder crops exactly where scientists say they were domesticated.

The scientists say that it's hard to pinpoint exactly where, and that agriculture started in three different locations: Fertile Crescent, Central Asia, and west Cyprus, Anatolia and Greece. So it's interesting that the Bible completely missed Asia and Cyprus/Greece.

 

[ScuzManiac]

Apparently so.

Care to give it a go?

Sure.

I'm all ears...

 

[Thief]

Sure.

I'm all ears...

Man as a species...Day Six.
Day Seven....rest....and no more will be created.

THEN Chapter Two....
A single specimen is chosen.
Placed into ideal living conditions.
He is laid to a deep sleep and a rib is removed.
The rib is increased to full stature.
As the increase is dealt the sample is genetically altered to form as female.

These things we now know could happen.

I find Chapter remarkable as it is a report made at a time when such believing could only hold in trust and faith.

Take a rib from a man as he sleeps?......that's murder.
Take that rib as he sleeps...and the man recovers?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We now know such things CAN happen.

Thousands of years ago, people gave their faith to what could not be proven.

and here we are asking for proof.....even when we now know better.

 

[ScuzManiac]

Man as a species...Day Six.
Day Seven....rest....and no more will be created.

THEN Chapter Two....
A single specimen is chosen.
Placed into ideal living conditions.
He is laid to a deep sleep and a rib is removed.
The rib is increased to full stature.
As the increase is dealt the sample is genetically altered to form as female.

These things we now know could happen.

I find Chapter remarkable as it is a report made at a time when such believing could only hold in trust and faith.

Take a rib from a man as he sleeps?......that's murder.
Take that rib as he sleeps...and the man recovers?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We now know such things CAN happen.

Thousands of years ago, people gave their faith to what could not be proven.

and here we are asking for proof.....even when we now know better.

We know these things CAN happen?

What makes you think that it is possible that a man was put to sleep thousands of years ago, had his rib removed, and a woman was made from that rib?

We can't even do that NOW.

This is far from proof. All you're doing is referring to Genesis and saying that these things CAN happen without a single source of something like this EVER happening outside of The Bible.

Is it also possible that we could make a man out of dust?

And if you're going to be FOR what's in The Bible....

It would help to have some outside evidence that SUPPORTS what is in The Bible.

Name ONE Biblical relic that we have found. Why can we find relics related to almost everything that is historical fact EXCEPT what's in The Bible?

I'll wait.

 

[CG Didymus]

Man as a species...Day Six.
Day Seven....rest....and no more will be created.

THEN Chapter Two....
A single specimen is chosen.
Placed into ideal living conditions.
He is laid to a deep sleep and a rib is removed.
The rib is increased to full stature.
As the increase is dealt the sample is genetically altered to form as female.

I have no problem believing the spiritual/religious intent in Genesis. But that makes all this other stuff mythology. And still, it's Christians not Jews, that are arguing for a literal interpretation. So the creation order changes from chapter one to two. The Sun and stars aren't created until after the Earth and vegetation. But then God makes male and female animals, and for some reason forgets to make Adam a female? Like I said, I have no problem with a poetic spiritual creation story. Having been made for and by the Jews. Having been past on and redacted from their own traditions and a few traditions borrowed from other cultures.

But another problem is, it is only a quick sketch of what supposedly happened. Hundreds of years pass by from one verse to another. And isn't it true that nothing is mentioned for the four hundred years between Joseph and the time of Moses? There's too many gaps and important history missing. Unless, all of that history is unimportant and immaterial to the story. And I do believe the rest of early human history is immaterial to this story. This is the story about the Jewish people. It's not about all the people in all the other parts of the world. They have their own creation stories.

Hmm? I wonder who's the most important and the "chosen" people in those other stories? I'd imagine it's probably the people that wrote those stories. Did their God write it for them? Did an angel come tell some prophet what to write? I wouldn't doubt it. But do you and I believe those stories are really true? No, they are religious mythology written by those people for those people. About things that relate to them and how they see themselves fitting into the world.

The Christians plop themselves right into the Bible. The overlay almost works. It almost makes sense, but not everywhere and not with everything. Christian literalists/fundamentalists need Genesis to be the true and accurate account of historical events. But they don't always work. So what's so wrong with that? What's wrong is not being able to question and find alternative explanations for what happened.

Like with the stories in other Holy Books, should we question those creation stories? Should we doubt other Holy Books when they have people flying around and doing other miraculous things? Yes, I do and I'm sure you do. But then, how come when it comes to your religion and your Holy Book you don't. You don't doubt it. You don't question it. Even though, the Bible also has people flying in the sky, or at least flying off on a fiery chariot. And, of course Enoch and Jesus, and someday the believers being raptured and floating off to heaven. But did those things really happen? And will they? They sure make for a good story, though.

But never mind that, back to Genesis, so many things. Like what about God being worried about people building a tower so high that it would reach heaven? Really? Why was he worried then and not now? It's okay with him that we build our skyscrapers? What about the Egyptians and their pyramids? Those weren't high enough to be a threat? And, is that really when all the other languages first came to be? I suppose before that, Hebrew was the only language, right? Sorry, there's just too many things that don't add up.

 

[ScuzManiac]

I have no problem believing the spiritual/religious intent in Genesis. But that makes all this other stuff mythology. And still, it's Christians not Jews, that are arguing for a literal interpretation. So the creation order changes from chapter one to two. The Sun and stars aren't created until after the Earth and vegetation. But then God makes male and female animals, and for some reason forgets to make Adam a female? Like I said, I have no problem with a poetic spiritual creation story. Having been made for and by the Jews. Having been past on and redacted from their own traditions and a few traditions borrowed from other cultures.

But another problem is, it is only a quick sketch of what supposedly happened. Hundreds of years pass by from one verse to another. And isn't it true that nothing is mentioned for the four hundred years between Joseph and the time of Moses? There's too many gaps and important history missing. Unless, all of that history is unimportant and immaterial to the story. And I do believe the rest of early human history is immaterial to this story. This is the story about the Jewish people. It's not about all the people in all the other parts of the world. They have their own creation stories.

Hmm? I wonder who's the most important and the "chosen" people in those other stories? I'd imagine it's probably the people that wrote those stories. Did their God write it for them? Did an angel come tell some prophet what to write? I wouldn't doubt it. But do you and I believe those stories are really true? No, they are religious mythology written by those people for those people. About things that relate to them and how they see themselves fitting into the world.

The Christians plop themselves right into the Bible. The overlay almost works. It almost makes sense, but not everywhere and not with everything. Christian literalists/fundamentalists need Genesis to be the true and accurate account of historical events. But they don't always work. So what's so wrong with that? What's wrong is not being able to question and find alternative explanations for what happened.

Like with the stories in other Holy Books, should we question those creation stories? Should we doubt other Holy Books when they have people flying around and doing other miraculous things? Yes, I do and I'm sure you do. But then, how come when it comes to your religion and your Holy Book you don't. You don't doubt it. You don't question it. Even though, the Bible also has people flying in the sky, or at least flying off on a fiery chariot. And, of course Enoch and Jesus, and someday the believers being raptured and floating off to heaven. But did those things really happen? And will they? They sure make for a good story, though.

But never mind that, back to Genesis, so many things. Like what about God being worried about people building a tower so high that it would reach heaven? Really? Why was he worried then and not now? It's okay with him that we build our skyscrapers? What about the Egyptians and their pyramids? Those weren't high enough to be a threat? And, is that really when all the other languages first came to be? I suppose before that, Hebrew was the only language, right? Sorry, there's just too many things that don't add up.

You're using your brain too much dude.

Follow the "you only use 10% of your brain" myth and just have a little faith.

 

[CG Didymus]

You're using your brain too much dude.

Follow the "you only use 10% of your brain" myth and just have a little faith.

Sorry, but I didn't realize it. I think I'm using the wrong side. Don't worry, with a little faith, I think I can stop it and go back to using the correct side. Which is the correct side the left or the right? Or the middle? Or the part at the bottom? Or, maybe, none of it? Probably that's best, at least for me, because even with 10% of any part of the brain, it's bound to lead me into wrong ideas. Thanks so much for pointing that out. Now let me find my Bible and start reading it the right way, without my brain.

 

[Thief]

I have no problem believing the spiritual/religious intent in Genesis. But that makes all this other stuff mythology. And still, it's Christians not Jews, that are arguing for a literal interpretation. So the creation order changes from chapter one to two. The Sun and stars aren't created until after the Earth and vegetation. But then God makes male and female animals, and for some reason forgets to make Adam a female? Like I said, I have no problem with a poetic spiritual creation story. Having been made for and by the Jews. Having been past on and redacted from their own traditions and a few traditions borrowed from other cultures.

But another problem is, it is only a quick sketch of what supposedly happened. Hundreds of years pass by from one verse to another. And isn't it true that nothing is mentioned for the four hundred years between Joseph and the time of Moses? There's too many gaps and important history missing. Unless, all of that history is unimportant and immaterial to the story. And I do believe the rest of early human history is immaterial to this story. This is the story about the Jewish people. It's not about all the people in all the other parts of the world. They have their own creation stories.

Hmm? I wonder who's the most important and the "chosen" people in those other stories? I'd imagine it's probably the people that wrote those stories. Did their God write it for them? Did an angel come tell some prophet what to write? I wouldn't doubt it. But do you and I believe those stories are really true? No, they are religious mythology written by those people for those people. About things that relate to them and how they see themselves fitting into the world.

The Christians plop themselves right into the Bible. The overlay almost works. It almost makes sense, but not everywhere and not with everything. Christian literalists/fundamentalists need Genesis to be the true and accurate account of historical events. But they don't always work. So what's so wrong with that? What's wrong is not being able to question and find alternative explanations for what happened.

Like with the stories in other Holy Books, should we question those creation stories? Should we doubt other Holy Books when they have people flying around and doing other miraculous things? Yes, I do and I'm sure you do. But then, how come when it comes to your religion and your Holy Book you don't. You don't doubt it. You don't question it. Even though, the Bible also has people flying in the sky, or at least flying off on a fiery chariot. And, of course Enoch and Jesus, and someday the believers being raptured and floating off to heaven. But did those things really happen? And will they? They sure make for a good story, though.

But never mind that, back to Genesis, so many things. Like what about God being worried about people building a tower so high that it would reach heaven? Really? Why was he worried then and not now? It's okay with him that we build our skyscrapers? What about the Egyptians and their pyramids? Those weren't high enough to be a threat? And, is that really when all the other languages first came to be? I suppose before that, Hebrew was the only language, right? Sorry, there's just too many things that don't add up.

You're over thinking it.
This thread is supposed to be a focus on Genesis.

I have no religion and I'm not into the curve thrown by dogma.
I see Genesis as an Introduction of a Creator to His Creation.

I don't need religion for that.

Would you like a second go at retorting my previous post?

 

[Thief]

We know these things CAN happen?

What makes you think that it is possible that a man was put to sleep thousands of years ago, had his rib removed, and a woman was made from that rib?

We can't even do that NOW.

This is far from proof. All you're doing is referring to Genesis and saying that these things CAN happen without a single source of something like this EVER happening outside of The Bible.

Is it also possible that we could make a man out of dust?

And if you're going to be FOR what's in The Bible....

It would help to have some outside evidence that SUPPORTS what is in The Bible.

Name ONE Biblical relic that we have found. Why can we find relics related to almost everything that is historical fact EXCEPT what's in The Bible?

I'll wait.

Actually we Can do such things.
The law is in the way as the experiment is pending.

And we ARE made of dust.