Genesis Account of Creation: Firmament

[JesusKnowsYou]

Broadly, fundamentalism has NOTHING to do with Jeff Warren or his ilk.

I understand this and said as much. You would have noticed if you took the time to actually read my post.

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (FLDS) has very much to do with Warren Jeffs (who is Jeff Warren?).

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

And everyone is guided "of" god to a different
flawless interpretation.

"As long as it is interpreted correctly" means a Marvel comic
can be the inerrant word of god ifn ya read it right.

If you have led yourself to think A and E are
as told in genesis, that there was a flood etc
you have gone into the deep waters of self deception.

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

Just for your information, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not believe that Marvel Comics are the inerrant Word of God.

The LDS Church also believes that Adam and Eve were real people and that they were the parents of the human race.

There is no solid interpretation on the Flood event except in the fact that such an event occurred.

How devastating or widespread were the effects of said event has not been revealed or agreed upon.

Again, thank you for sharing your opinion, but I do not place any value in it.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Who would have the right translation and interpretation?

The Catholic's translation and interpretation? The Greek Orthodox's version? The Protestant's?

The LDS's version?

In all different interpretations and different translations of the Genesis creation, creationists have the tendencies to ignore the Hebrew texts and ignore the Jewish interpretations.

After all, the Genesis was originally intended for the ancient Jews or Israelites in mind, not for Christians.

And yet, we have creationists twisting the Genesis beyond the original contexts.

And if I remember correctly, the LDS version of the Bible was re-written by Joseph Smith, from the King James Bible (KJV). Smith didn't do a new translation from the Greek or Hebrew sources, eg the Septuagint and Masoretic Text, respectively. What Smith did was editing and paraphrasing the KJV.

According to LDS stance, Smith corrected the Old Testament. But how can Smith possibly corrected anything, if he cannot read Hebrew or Greek?

The original KJV translation of the Old Testament, particularly the Genesis, were mostly based on the Masoretic Text (more specifically the Leningrad Codex), where the Septuagint (Codex Vaticanus) wasn’t used at all in Genesis.

So whose interpretations to use, is matter of either personal preference or your church’s preference.

The version of the Holy Bible used by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the King James Version.

The Prophet Joseph Smith did write what has been referred to as both the "Inspired Version" and the "Joseph Smith Translation" of the Holy Bible.

This work is regarded by the Church as an inspired Bible commentary of the Prophet's.

It is informative, but it is not the version of the Bible that we use in the Church.

We also do not believe it to be a "correction" to the Bible.

For your information, however, the Prophet could read both Hebrew and Greek.

Generally speaking, members of the Church believe modern-day Prophets and Apostles are those who have the authority to correctly translate and interpret the scriptures.

However, we also believe that anyone who has received the gift of the Holy Ghost can translate and interpret the scriptures correctly, although they do so without authority.

We also tend to believe that those doctrines and principles that agree between the Bible and the Book of Mormon (as well as other latter-day scripture) are pure and true.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Here, you are conjecturing, or making things up.

There is no Satan in Genesis 4.

How would you know Cain love Satan? How do you know there is relationship between Cain and Satan?

You are adding things that are not there.

No, I am using my knowledge of the scriptures.

John, in his first general epistle, claimed that it is by their works that the "children of the devil" are manifest (1 John 3:10).

Then he said concerning Cain and Satan,

"For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.

Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous." (1 John 3:11-12) (Bold and italics added)

Then as we return to the Genesis account,

"And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." (Genesis 4:6-7) (Bold and italics added)

Who do you believe the "his" and "him" mentioned by the Lord are referring to?

I believe that since John, an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, claimed that Cain was a child of Satan, the devil, that these are references to him.

It is Satan and his minions who entice all of Mankind to commit sin.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Yeah. I hear that from all manner of believer who all believe only they and theirs can understand the Word of God properly. Their translations and interpretations are different from your translations and interpretations yet you all believe that YOU have it right.

So, you believe that it is wrong for anyone to believe that they are right?

You don't ever believe that you are right?

OK. But that didn't stop you from making comments like...

Why should my belief that the Genesis account is not a complete and perfect record stop me from making any of the comments I made?

My beliefs are not confined to only what the Genesis account records.

I don't understand why I should stop myself from mentioning other possible sources of truth.

What other accounts?

The Genesis account claims that Adam "begat sons and daughters" (Genesis 5:4)

There are many apocryphal and pseudepigraphical works written about the same events covered in the Genesis account.

I tend to rely mostly on the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price (ancient and latter-day scripture) to gain further insight into the events described in the Genesis account.

Who recorded that?

The Genesis account claims that Adam lived to be 930 years old. (Genesis 5:5)

Where is it written that Cain married one of his sisters?

Various Abrahamic traditions claim this. The Book of Jubilees claims that her name was Awan.

As I said previously, I am trying to keep my comments confined to the Genesis account, but when people start talking about other human beings outside of the family of Adam and Eve, I feel the need to mention these other records.

My claim that Cain married one of his sisters was my attempt to stay as close to the Genesis account as possible.

I personally believe that he married the daughter of one of his brothers, which is recorded in the Book of Moses, a work received by revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith and is contained in the Pearl of Great Price.

You have a fundamentalist belief in the literal truth of Genesis. That makes you a fundamentalist in terms of the general population.

As far as this discussion is concerned, all I have been doing is claiming that nothing said by anyone disproves the claims made in the Genesis account.

That is not an argument for the account's authenticity or literal truth.

I believe that the account is describing real events that occurred, but I disagree with many things recorded and believe that they were translated or interpreted incorrectly.

I personally do not believe that the Creation consisted of seven 24-hour creative periods.

I believe that Adam was known as Michael before his physical formation and that he took part in the Creation of the Earth.

I also do not believe that Adam and Eve's physical creations were as simple as forming him from the dust and her from Adam's rib.

I believe that Adam and Eve were not mortal in the Garden and lived there for a long time before partaking of the fruit.

I believe that it was Satan that spoke through the serpent by proxy and that he first approached and tempted Adam before attempting to tempt Eve.

I also believe that Adam and Eve left the Garden with a full knowledge of their eventual salvation through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.

If you have a different notion of it within your sect, well, I shouldn't be expected to keep up with the differences.

I would expect you to keep up with them now since I just informed you.

 

[Audie]

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

Just for your information, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not believe that Marvel Comics are the inerrant Word of God.

The LDS Church also believes that Adam and Eve were real people and that they were the parents of the human race.

There is no solid interpretation on the Flood event except in the fact that such an event occurred.

How devastating or widespread were the effects of said event has not been revealed or agreed upon.

Again, thank you for sharing your opinion, but I do not place any value in it.

So "flood" could have been splash splash in a farnyard
or the entire world. Some story that makes.

Re value, the judgement of anyone who could
believe J Smith's story has no value at all.

 

[gnostic]

No, I am using my knowledge of the scriptures.

John, in his first general epistle, claimed that it is by their works that the "children of the devil" are manifest (1 John 3:10).

Then he said concerning Cain and Satan,

"For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.

Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous." (1 John 3:11-12) (Bold and italics added)

Then as we return to the Genesis account,

"And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." (Genesis 4:6-7) (Bold and italics added)

Who do you believe the "his" and "him" mentioned by the Lord are referring to?

I believe that since John, an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, claimed that Cain was a child of Satan, the devil, that these are references to him.

It is Satan and his minions who entice all of Mankind to commit sin.

I used to believe in Christian or Church interpretations of the Bible, but I was younger back then, had less understanding of the scholarship and inexperience in double-checking sources.

In the last (nearly) 20 years, I don't trust church interpretations of the Old Testament, because I come to realization that these interpretations are often rationalize to fit with Christian agenda.

You relying and quoting NT passages (eg 1 John 3) to apply against Genesis 4, is exactly, the sort of things I would expect from Christians to change the context of the OT, particularly Genesis.

Whoever wrote 1 John, be that John himself or someone else (it doesn't matter, which), to write about something concerning texts centuries before John, is merely expressing his personal opinion based on his interpretation in accordance with Christian teachings.

Satan never appeared in Genesis, PERIOD. That's Christian talking, and right now, you are simply adding things that's not found in Genesis, based on person who wrote the John's letter.

I am not going to take John (or whoever he wrote that letter) as authority of Genesis, considering that he is changing the context of Genesis 4, as you are doing too.

I don't trust NT authors' interpretations of Genesis or any other OT books.

It is Christian interpretations that made me doubt Christian teachings in the first place, back in 2000, that started me down the path of agnosticism. (I am talking about the gospel of Matthew (1:23) changing the context of Isaiah's sign (Isaiah 7:14).)

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

So "flood" could have been splash splash in a farnyard or the entire world. Some story that makes.

No. Read the Genesis account. Something devastating occurred that caused massive loss of life.

Whether or not it was a worldwide event cannot be determined by the Genesis account alone.

It definitely was not a splash in the "farnyard".

Re value, the judgement of anyone who could believe J Smith's story has no value at all.

I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God is because I read the Book of Mormon, prayed about it's truthfulness and the Holy Spirit confirmed to me that it was true.

Since I became convinced that the Book of Mormon was true I also knew that the translator of that work was true.

Have you ever read the Book of Mormon?

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

I used to believe in Christian or Church interpretations of the Bible, but I was younger back then, had less understanding of the scholarship and inexperience in double-checking sources.

In the last (nearly) 20 years, I don't trust church interpretations of the Old Testament, because I come to realization that these interpretations are often rationalize to fit with Christian agenda.

You relying and quoting NT passages (eg 1 John 3) to apply against Genesis 4, is exactly, the sort of things I would expect from Christians to change the context of the OT, particularly Genesis.

Whoever wrote 1 John, be that John himself or someone else (it doesn't matter, which), to write about something concerning texts centuries before John, is merely expressing his personal opinion based on his interpretation in accordance with Christian teachings.

Satan never appeared in Genesis, PERIOD. That's Christian talking, and right now, you are simply adding things that's not found in Genesis, based on person who wrote the John's letter.

I am not going to take John (or whoever he wrote that letter) as authority of Genesis, considering that he is changing the context of Genesis 4, as you are doing too.

I don't trust NT authors' interpretations of Genesis or any other OT books.

It is Christian interpretations that made me doubt Christian teachings in the first place, back in 2000, that started me down the path of agnosticism. (I am talking about the gospel of Matthew (1:23) changing the context of Isaiah's sign (Isaiah 7:14).)

John was an apostle and prophet and as such he had the authority to interpret scripture accurately.

Also, he was born and raised a Jew and had a native-born Jew's understanding of the Old Testament.

I value his inspired and authoritative interpretation of Genesis over yours.

 

[Audie]

So, you believe that it is wrong for anyone to believe that they are right?

You don't ever believe that you are right?

Why should my belief that the Genesis account is not a complete and perfect record stop me from making any of the comments I made?

My beliefs are not confined to only what the Genesis account records.

I don't understand why I should stop myself from mentioning other possible sources of truth.

The Genesis account claims that Adam "begat sons and daughters" (Genesis 5:4)

There are many apocryphal and pseudepigraphical works written about the same events covered in the Genesis account.

I tend to rely mostly on the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price (ancient and latter-day scripture) to gain further insight into the events described in the Genesis account.

The Genesis account claims that Adam lived to be 930 years old. (Genesis 5:5)

Various Abrahamic traditions claim this. The Book of Jubilees claims that her name was Awan.

As I said previously, I am trying to keep my comments confined to the Genesis account, but when people start talking about other human beings outside of the family of Adam and Eve, I feel the need to mention these other records.

My claim that Cain married one of his sisters was my attempt to stay as close to the Genesis account as possible.

I personally believe that he married the daughter of one of his brothers, which is recorded in the Book of Moses, a work received by revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith and is contained in the Pearl of Great Price.

As far as this discussion is concerned, all I have been doing is claiming that nothing said by anyone disproves the claims made in the Genesis account.

That is not an argument for the account's authenticity or literal truth.

I believe that the account is describing real events that occurred, but I disagree with many things recorded and believe that they were translated or interpreted incorrectly.

I personally do not believe that the Creation consisted of seven 24-hour creative periods.

I believe that Adam was known as Michael before his physical formation and that he took part in the Creation of the Earth.

I also do not believe that Adam and Eve's physical creations were as simple as forming him from the dust and her from Adam's rib.

I believe that Adam and Eve were not mortal in the Garden and lived there for a long time before partaking of the fruit.

I believe that it was Satan that spoke through the serpent by proxy and that he first approached and tempted Adam before attempting to tempt Eve.

I also believe that Adam and Eve left the Garden with a full knowledge of their eventual salvation through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I would expect you to keep up with them now since I just informed you.

Of course the claims in genesis cannot be disproved if nobody
knows what genesis says.

 

[Audie]

No. Read the Genesis account. Something devastating occurred that caused massive loss of life.

Whether or not it was a worldwide event cannot be determined by the Genesis account alone.

It definitely was not a splash in the "farnyard".

I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God is because I read the Book of Mormon, prayed about it's truthfulness and the Holy Spirit confirmed to me that it was true.

Since I became convinced that the Book of Mormon was true I also knew that the translator of that work was true.

Have you ever read the Book of Mormon?

I have read the Genesis account. It is very specific about what
supposedly happened.

"Something" and "devastating" is about as vague as you can get.
Little more than splash splash .
There is zero evidence of world wide devastation of human
and other life at any time in human existence.

Any idea as to why there is no physical evidence of any sort?

The account as written is false in every detail, and, your
"devastating" is what might be called "facts not in evidence".
You could at least say, "I believe".


Having read "Jusepth Smith Tells His Own Story" and the BoM
I was puzzled how anyone could possibly believe such a ridiculous
story. Same with OT and NT, of course.

Now, before going any further, I wish to say that I dont have
anything against Mormons. Actually, the clean living, self-reliance,
community, and commitment to achievement are pretty admirable.
I've said on occasion, that if one religion had to be the one and
only in America, I would pick LDS,

Anyway, lets look at
"and the Holy Spirit confirmed to me that it was true."

As it happens, I had a good talk in Taipei with a Mormon missionary
about my age at the time. I asked him, in so many words, how
anyone could believe such a ridiculous story.

His answer was a bit of an epiphany for me. Briefly, he said he
was born into LDS, had his doubts, as a teen he prayed for the
answer, is it all true? Said he prayed for nearly a week,then,
it came to him with unmistakable clarity: YES IT IS ALL TRUE.

So that was ii, for him.

Epiphany for me, in that it was the same experience I had when
I was trying to decide what grad school to go to. A,B, or C?

I stewed and worried and lay awake trying to decide. Then it
came to me, very strong and clear, total conviction, while I
was not even thinking about it. "GO (THOU UNTO) A!"

Wow that was decisive! I guess that is it!

But, I am, tho, not the kind of girl who
gives up just like that, so I went back to worrying.

A few days later, here it comes again, but now it is C!
And later it was B, A.

Now, I dont know if my friend in Taipei was hoping to hear
it is true. Did you? Your "confirmed" suggests that you did.

What do you suppose that he, or you,would have heard if
you had not been satisfied and kept praying?

As I understand it the native americans used to do things
like go on a spirit quest, like sit on a hilltop chanting and fasting
until they had a vision. A white buffalo, perhaps. Others do other
things, get other results.

Does all of this seem more likely to be the product of human
psychology,or of spirits such as the white buffalo being induced
to make comments inside one's head?

 

[Audie]

John was an apostle and prophet and as such he had the authority to interpret scripture accurately.

Also, he was born and raised a Jew and had a native-born Jew's understanding of the Old Testament.

I value his inspired and authoritative interpretation of Genesis over yours.

What in your opinion was authoritative and inspired. Facts
not in evidence indicate a paucity of reason.

As for interpretation of genesis. the six day poof, with living
things created as they are now, and and eve, the flood, all of
those things are a) demonstrably false and b) without any
trace of supporting evidence as counter argument.

Those were ignorant, credulous and superstitious times.
Some of us would prefer to get past that.

 

[ecco]

So, you believe that it is wrong for anyone to believe that they are right?

What did I say that led you to that nonsensical conclusion?

I said: "Their translations and interpretations are different from your translations and interpretations yet you all believe that YOU have it right."

Since you all believe in different gods, you can't all be right. However, evidence and lack of evidence shows that you all are wrong.

 

[ecco]

There are many apocryphal and pseudepigraphical works written about the same events covered in the Genesis account.

I tend to rely mostly on the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price (ancient and latter-day scripture) to gain further insight into the events described in the Genesis account.

Who wrote these accounts? Did God talk to the authors and describe, in more detail than in Genesis, things that actually happened?

The Genesis account claims that Adam lived to be 930 years old. (Genesis 5:5)

So why don't we live to be 900 years?

Various Abrahamic traditions claim this. The Book of Jubilees claims that her name was Awan.

Do these various accounts ever disagree with each other? If all are the word of God, how can there be disagreement?

 

[ecco]

My claim that Cain married one of his sisters was my attempt to stay as close to the Genesis account as possible.

I personally believe that he married the daughter of one of his brothers, which is recorded in the Book of Moses, a work received by revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith and is contained in the Pearl of Great Price.

If I recall, Genesis says nothing about the lineage of Cain's wife. You are saying that Joseph Smith got more information directly from God, right?

As far as this discussion is concerned, all I have been doing is claiming that nothing said by anyone disproves the claims made in the Genesis account.

That is not an argument for the account's authenticity or literal truth.

There is no argument that can be made for the authenticity or literal truth of Genesis. Genesis has been thoroughly refuted by science.

• The earth is much older than 6000 years.
• The Flood never occurred.
• Heliocentricity.

I believe that the account is describing real events that occurred, but I disagree with many things recorded and believe that they were translated or interpreted incorrectly.

So, like almost all religous people, you pick and choose what parts of scripture are real and what parts are wrong. Somehow, you have the knowledge and training and insight to decide what parts were translated or interpreted incorrectly.

Uh huh.

I personally do not believe that the Creation consisted of seven 24-hour creative periods.

I believe that Adam was known as Michael before his physical formation and that he took part in the Creation of the Earth.

I also do not believe that Adam and Eve's physical creations were as simple as forming him from the dust and her from Adam's rib.

See above.

I believe that Adam and Eve were not mortal in the Garden and lived there for a long time before partaking of the fruit.

I believe that it was Satan that spoke through the serpent by proxy and that he first approached and tempted Adam before attempting to tempt Eve.

I also believe that Adam and Eve left the Garden with a full knowledge of their eventual salvation through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.

See above.

I would expect you to keep up with them now since I just informed you.

There is no way I can keep up with all the thousands of different belief systems. I'll be willing to bet that not all LDS agree with you. I doubt that they could remember what all the other LDS members believe.

 

[ecco]

Having read "Jusepth Smith Tells His Own Story" and the BoM
I was puzzled how anyone could possibly believe such a ridiculous
story. Same with OT and NT, of course.

Funny.

 

[Audie]

Funny.

Why is that? It is not said in jest.

 

[Audie]

If I recall, Genesis says nothing about the lineage of Cain's wife. You are saying that Joseph Smith got more information directly from God, right?



There is no argument that can be made for the authenticity or literal truth of Genesis. Genesis has been thoroughly refuted by science.

• The earth is much older than 6000 years.
• The Flood never occurred.
• Heliocentricity.

So, like almost all religous people, you pick and choose what parts of scripture are real and what parts are wrong. Somehow, you have the knowledge and training and insight to decide what parts were translated or interpreted incorrectly.

Uh huh.



See above.



See above.



There is no way I can keep up with all the thousands of different belief systems. I'll be willing to bet that not all LDS agree with you. I doubt that they could remember what all the other LDS members believe.

A expert on what science is right too.

 

[gnostic]

John was an apostle and prophet and as such he had the authority to interpret scripture accurately.

Also, he was born and raised a Jew and had a native-born Jew's understanding of the Old Testament.

I value his inspired and authoritative interpretation of Genesis over yours.

All that don't mean much, JesusKnowsYou.

First of, all we don't know if the apostle John was really the author of those letters, as well as that gospel.

Second. There are some discrepancies and contradictions in the gospels:

• 2 versions of Jesus’ birth.
• 2 different genealogies for Jesus.
• The gospel of John differed from those of Matthew’s and Mark’s, regarding to anointing Jesus with expensive perfume at Bethany. While in Luke’s version, it occurred in a town in Galilee with different host.
• 4 different versions of which women went to Jesus’ tomb.
• Other gospels don’t have John’s raising of Lazarus, which was supposedly be a very important miracle.

My points are the New Testament gospels and epistles are not reliable sources.

 

[ecco]

Why is that? It is not said in jest.

That wasn't a critical funny.