Genesis chapter 1

[tomasortega]

To the ancient Hebrews, light was independent of the Sun. We now know this is not true.




As far as the ancient Hebrews were concerned, that's all the Sun was meant for. Remember that they were living side-by-side with people who were worshiping the Sun as a deity.



There was no way for the ancient Hebrews to know that the Moon reflects the Sun's light.







...What makes you think the ancient Hebrews, or, more specifically, author "P", had anything indicating otherwise that the Earth was the center of the universe?



Again, I have to point out that the ancient Hebrews had NO IDEA how expansive the universe really is..

thats exactly what im trying to point out! the people who authored the bible were just average schmos limited to the knowledge and beliefs of that ancient time. proving that the bible or specifically the bible's authors were not in any way influenced or inspired by a divine power in writing the bible. which is what every christian claims. that the holy bible was inspired by god, or is "god's word"

now that we have established that the bible is not inspired by an omniscient being, we can throw it on the same pile with every other ancient literature and fairy tale. its not any better than say BEOWULF.

Chapter 1 was written by a different person that Chapters 2 and 3.

.

i hope you can back that claim

As far as I know, there weren't that many carnivors that had humans on their menus in Mesopotamia, though I may be mistaken.

.

it doesnt matter how many carnivores existed. point is, they did exist. which contradicts the bible

 

[Riverwolf]

how do we know what is truth and what is fiction?

"Artists use lies to tell the truth." -V for Vendetta

 

[sojourner]

thats exactly what im trying to point out! whoever authored the bible was just another average schmo limited to the knowledge and beliefs of that ancient time. prooving that the bible or specifically the bible's authors were not in any way influenced or inspired by a divine power in writing the bible.

How does it prove that? God uses average people to do all kinds of things. The Bible is worth more than other literature, because the Bible is the specific witness of the Faithful with regard to our relationship with God.

 

[ayani]

two websites which may be of help:

Bible Questions Answered

and

Answers in Genesis - Creation, Evolution, Christian Apologetics

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

two websites which may be of help:

Bible Questions Answered

and

Answers in Genesis - Creation, Evolution, Christian Apologetics

Tiresome garbage.

 

[sojourner]

Tiresome garbage.

Like the OP?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Like the OP?

No, the OP was TIRESOME GARBAGE.

 

[ChristineES]

The OP was yet another attempt to try and make believers look foolish for believing in it. Sometimes I just wish they would be honest and just say right out that they think that Genesis and the rest of the bible is fallacy.

 

[Riverwolf]

thats exactly what im trying to point out! the people who authored the bible was just another average schmo limited to the knowledge and beliefs of that ancient time. prooving that the bible or specifically the bible's authors were not in any way influenced or inspired by a divine power in writing the bible. which is what every christian claims. that the holy bible was inspired by god, or is "god's word"

now that we have established that the bible is not inspired by an omniscient being, we can throw it on the same pile with every other ancient literature and fairy tale. its not any better than say BEOWULF.

MANY MANY Christians do not believe the entire Bible is God's word. In fact, one of them is debating with you right now.

I also know a Methodist Christian who put his finger on a parable by Jesus and stated clearly that it "was not God."

Don't fall into the trap of lumping all Christians into one group. Educate yourself before making conclusions.

(BTW, I LOVE Beowulf!!!)

i hope you can back that claim

Okeydokey.

"Slowly, with the rise of rationalism, particularly as associated with figures such as Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Benedict (Baruch) Spinoza (1632-1677), the view that the Torah was a unified whole, written by Moses, began to be questioned. ... This culminated in the development of the model of the Documentary Hypothesis of the 19th century, according to which the Torah (or Hexateuch) is comprised of four main sources or documents which were edited or redacted together: J, E, P, and D. Each of these sources or documents is embedded in a (relatively) complete form of the current Torah, and is typified by vocabulary, literary style, and theological perspective.
"J and E are so called after the names for God that each of them uses in Genesis: J uses the name "Yahveh" (German "Jahwe," hence "J"), translated in the NJPS as "LORD," though it is really a personal name whose exact meaning is unknown; E prefers to call the deity "Elohim" (translated "God"), an epithet which also serves as the generic term for God or gods in the Bible. P, which also uses "Elohim," is an abbreviation for the Priestly material, and D refers to the Deuteronomist, primarily in Deuteronomy.
"The difference in divine names, however, is not the main criterion used by scholars for suggesting that the Torah is not a unified composition. Much more significant are doublets and contradictions, in both narrative and legal material."

-Introduction to the Torah, from "The Jewish Study Bible."

There. Jews stating this in the introduction to their own Bible.

Will that pursuade you to read one of their commentaries?

it doesnt matter how many carnivores existed. point is, they did exist. which contradicts the bible

The ancients didn't know that.

 

[sojourner]

No, the OP was TIRESOME GARBAGE.

Yeah, that's what I meant. You said, "Tiresome garbage." I said, "Like the OP?"
Meaning, "tiresome garbage, like the OP?"
I had no doubt what you would think of the OP.

 

[sojourner]

The OP was yet another attempt to try and make believers look foolish for believing in it. Sometimes I just wish they would be honest and just say right out that they think that Genesis and the rest of the bible is fallacy.

Sometimes I wish they'd just go away and leave us alone...

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Sometimes I wish they'd just go away and leave us alone...

I feel so dismissed ...

 

[sojourner]

I feel so dismissed ...

I don't get the idea that you think the Bible is a "fallacy."

 

[tomasortega]

why dont we keep this thread clean. if you dont like it, ignore it. there are hundreds of other threads you might like.

1. those christians who do not believe that the "entire" bible is the word of god. how do they determine which parts are god inspired or gods word and which are not? is it a personal decision. is it different for everyone? if so then where do we draw the line? there are some christians who say god accepts gays while others or most claim god hates them. are there some christians who believe that the whole bible is the word of god, and other christians who go as far as saying almost none of it is? what is fact, or truth and what is a lie or fiction? was the talking snake a fairy tale but the talking donkey really existed? who decides these things? and why do we need to decide at all? isnt the bible meant as some kind of a divine instruction manual to enlighten people and instruct them how to live their lifes? and to teach moral dos and donts? well excuse me, but an instruction manual shouldnt itself need an instruction manual, an answer shouldnt need an answer. if god commands "dont cook a young goat in its mother's milk", "dont suffer a witch to live" and "dont steal" side by side, who are we to say "oh well, this command looks good to me, but this other one is kinda silly, i think ill ignore it"?

 

[Riverwolf]

why dont we keep this thread clean. if you dont like it, ignore it. there are hundreds of other threads you might like.

1. those christians who do not believe that the "entire" bible is the word of god. how do they determine which parts are god inspired or gods word and which are not? is it a personal decision. is it different for everyone? if so then where do we draw the line? there are some christians who say god accepts gays while others or most claim god hates them. are there some christians who believe that the whole bible is the word of god, and other christians who go as far as saying almost none of it is? what is fact, or truth and what is a lie or fiction? was the talking snake a fairy tale but the talking donkey really existed? who decides these things? and why do we need to decide at all? isnt the bible meant as some kind of a divine instruction manual to enlighten people and instruct them how to live their lifes? and to teach moral dos and donts? well excuse me, but an instruction manual shouldnt itself need an instruction manual, an answer shouldnt need an answer. if god commands "dont cook a young goat in its mother's milk", "dont suffer a witch to live" and "dont steal" side by side, who are we to say "oh well, this command looks good to me, but this other one is kinda silly, i think ill ignore it"?

How do they decide? Through analytical reading and scholarly research. Haven't you heard of that?

EDIT: Meditating on verses and chapters helps, too.

 

[Hospitaller]

I think the problem is you're only taking in the Bible as a physical story, not as something that has any spiritual meaning (correct me if im wrong).

1- First, the morning and evening parts in 1:5 do not neccesarily signify the setting of the Sun and the rise of the Sun. One of these "days" could have been millions of years for all we know. The writer of Genesis recognized morning and evening as the beginning and end of a certain period in time. Remember this was a long time ago.

Also, the Garden of Eden was not the Earth as we know it now. Is it not possible that God could have kept his creations alive before creating a Sun that would supply for them? As for the Sun marking the start and end of days, maybe it was so. All life was sustained by God. Adam did not really have to eat. After original sin Adam and Eve began to feel all of the effects of an earthly life. Hence, plants did not neccesarily need the Sun for life in Eden.

Whoever wrote Genesis did not neccesarily know that the Moon was not a star. Besides, Genesis does not refer to the Moon as a star, you're just assuming that. To the author, the Moon looked like "light".

2- When God says "Let there be light", that doesn't literally mean that He told someone to make light for Him. "Let there be light" stands as a symbol for the process by which God created light, which could have been instantaneous.

Again, "God saw that the light was good" is not literal like "God saw the light, made a chart, compared results, and decided by analisis that the light was good." What is the defintion of good? Something is good when it fits the purpose for which it was made. God probably did literally see that the light fit its original purpose (which was probably to provide what was neccesary for Earth after original sin) after creating it, hence he did "see" that it was "good".

I'm not going to go any further if you aren't going to read it so let me know.

 

[Sola'lor]

Personally I think the creation story is filled with metaphor and symbolism. I believe some parts are to be taken literally but not everything.

Also I don't believe the "days" were literal days. I believe they were undefined periods of time. One day could have been fifty years another could have been 5 billion.

Additionally, I'm not sure how many others share this view point, but I don't believe these days were necessarily linear but rather phases. Some days could have been happening at the same time, instead of one day and then another.

 

[tomasortega]

How do they decide? Through analytical reading and scholarly research. Haven't you heard of that?

EDIT: Meditating on verses and chapters helps, too.

lol.... analytical reading and scholarly research? how marvelous dear sir.

is that supposed to give merit and authority to study bibles or something?

all that means is that a bunch of believers got together and interpreted the bible just like any other schmo out there. only difference is, they put a "biblical scholar" stamp on their interpretations. religious scholars go off of the biased concept that the bible is absolute truth in the first place and therefore cant possibly be wrong. then they work their way through the bible with that concept in mind and try to come up with the best possible theories and interpretations to fit and validate their initial belief.

for example: when god orders his people to kill another tribe (the midians i believe it was), including all women, children, infants, animals, etc. rather than giving you the obvious natural human response condemning this evil atrocity, the prestigious scholarly study bible blows right past reality and gives you the twisted BS indoctrination story of god's fatherly love and good intent, completely ignoring and dismissing the actual killing of hundreds of innocent children, as part of a greater good, a divine and wonderful lets hold hands and praise the LAUD teaching/message.

 

[Riverwolf]

lol.... analytical reading and scholarly research? how marvelous dear sir.

is that supposed to give merit and authority to study bibles or something?

all that means is that a bunch of believers got together and interpreted the bible just like any other schmo out there. only difference is, they put a "biblical scholar" stamp on their interpretations. religious scholars go off of the biased concept that the bible is absolute truth in the first place and therefore cant possibly be wrong. then they work their way through the bible with that concept in mind and try to come up with the best possible theories and interpretations to fit and validate their initial belief.

HENCE WHY YOU READ MORE THAN ONE!!!!!!

for example: when god orders his people to kill another tribe (the midians i believe it was), including all women, children, infants, animals, etc. rather than giving you the obvious natural human response condemning this evil atrocity, the prestigious scholarly study bible blows right past reality and gives you the twisted BS indoctrination story of god's fatherly love and good intent, completely ignoring and dismissing the actual killing of hundreds of innocent children, as part of a greater good, a divine and wonderful lets hold hands and praise the LAUD teaching/message.

How do you know that? Did you actually try READING one? If so, which one?

Perhaps you would be so kind as to direct me to the verse where that's instructed, not as proof that it's there, but so I can look it up in one of mine, and show you what the study Torahs I have say about it.

 

[Hospitaller]

all that means is that a bunch of believers got together and interpreted the bible just like any other schmo out there. only difference is, they put a "biblical scholar" stamp on their interpretations. religious scholars go off of the biased concept that the bible is absolute truth in the first place and therefore cant possibly be wrong. then they work their way through the bible with that concept in mind and try to come up with the best possible theories and interpretations to fit and validate their initial belief.

...right back at you...