Originally Posted by
sincerly
Yes, The Tanakh(all of the O.T./Scriptures) does establish the Validity of the Creator GOD through-out its pages. It is these first two chapters of Genesis that sets the stage for all the rest of the Whys and Hows that follow.
For one to arrive at the correct understanding---one has to start with the truth of Creation and not upon some myth/symbol/allegory.
This validity permeates the Tanakh, as I previously mentioned, and the issue of God creating all also appears throughout much of the Tanakh, so the implication that somehow only the creation accounts do this is in error.
Hi Metis, notice what I have underlined in my previous statement above. There is/was no ERROR on my part.
There is simply not one shred of objective evidence that there was a universal flood-- quite the opposite as the evidence according to geologists suggest that this simply didn't happen. Much like the creation accounts, the flood narrative appears to be of Babylonian origin, but was reworked by us to teach our own morals and values, and all cultures do this, btw.
The world's geologist in all of their assuming and speculation can not negate the Scriptural truths which the validity of the Scriptures/Tanakh gives. You are denying the very truths which Moses confirmed. Deut.4:5-9,
"Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the LORD my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it. Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for? And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day? Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons' sons; "
The "suggests/appears" are assumptions by those geologist; the Scriptural accounts give the GOD given account of that lead up to those events.
It was after the flood that all the remnant of the Flood scattered and set up "nations"/"kingdoms"---and began making records.
But thanks for the insight of """was reworked by us to teach our own morals and values""". That information explains why there were so many "Back-slidings" that GOD had to send Prophets to correct(punish) and bring back into some-what compliance--throughout the centuries.
OK, so you say that these are just "dreams/visions", and yet you believe in the "talking serpent" in Genesis 1 is real? How could you possibly determine as such?
I, also, believe that Balaam was spoken to by an Angel through a donkey.(Num.22:23-30) The adversary in Genesis was identified in Rev.12:7-9. (A fallen Angel)
The accounts do indeed smack of symbolism for not only the reason I mention, but also because of its poetic quality. "Adam", "Eve", and "Eden" each are symbolic names. We also now are aware of the fact that at least some in eretz Israel were aware of the Babylonian creation narrative because a tablet of such was found in northern Israel that predates the writing of Genesis. Again, instead of just copying it, we reworked it.
The question, therefore, arises as to authority for the "adding to or diminishing thereof" by the "we reworked it"??? The Scriptures give no such authority.
However, the writing of Genesis by Moses was done at least 800 years after the Flood by my calculations of the Scriptural records.
Metis, that "synbolism" in names does not necessarily mean the Created events were symbolic. Jacob was named that because he was a usurper. and then God Changed it to "Israel". He was a real person. And David?="beloved".
Read the next sentence very carefully, if you will: It makes not one shred of difference whether one takes the creation narratives literally or as allegory because the true value is not "did this happen literally this way" but, instead, it is "what is this telling us in general terms that's usable today". If Adam and Eve didn't literally exist, but the morals and values taught in the narratives did and do, then what's the problem? The true value is of the teachings of these morals and values, and they're still totally intact and valid today.
The problem isn't just in teaching the principles which are GOD given,(confirmed by the Tanakh/Bible) but the establishing of where mankind came from----nothing(evolution/theory)---or whether a Creator GOD Produced them and all one sees ---including those essential principles for a right relationship to that Being by HIS created Beings.
Evolution doesn't teach principles, but theexistencee of things. Mankind then formulated the "principles" and leaves out GOD.
What you're essentially doing is looking at these narratives from a modern western perspective that emphasizes objectiveness, but modern westerners did not write these scriptures-- traditional Asians that emphasized a much more subjective approach did. If one doesn't consider the nature of culture, differences caused by how religion evolves, and how this all influences how people write and interpret, then they will continue to make error after error after error.
And as long as people gullible accept man's theories over that which was inspired by a Creator GOD and was recorded for mankind's admonition and learning mankind/people will continue to be in error, falsehood, deception, lie, etc.
BTW, for you to tell me that "I'm saddened that you do not believe that your GOD is capable" is absolute total nonsense since the issue here is not how you and I may differ or agree in regards to how we may look at the issue of "God" but, instead, how one may interpret these accounts. Again, you're jumping to conclusions, and in this case it is absolutely disingenuous of you to post what you did with that.
Was it "absolutely disingenuous" for GOD to send all those Prophets to a rebellious people who claimed to be "HIS People"?
I am not a prophet, and as Amos stated, the Scriptures/messages given---is the message delivered. GOD gave no conflicting messages---it is persons who fail to see the total picture.
Believe as you acknowledge the truth has been "reworked".
