Problems with the biblical Genesis story (split)

[Arioch]

@Jan --

It's not moving the goalposts at all, it's using the logic supporting your argument against you. You have argued for your subjective interpretation of Genesis by saying that because it makes sense that must be the right way to interpret it(you've said so at least three times in this thread), claiming that without your artificial make/create dichotomy the book doesn't make sense. However if that is the criteria you are using, and you've said so yourself, then you must also accept that my interpretation of Genesis as a myth is just as valid, if not more so because it works with the rest of the bible as well.

You also never answered my question about the six days the bible said god created the world in. Care to weigh in on that finally, or are you just going to dodge the question again?

So to start off: in order to solve genesis does one have to read the text
literally?

No, one has to scrap the text and write something that makes the least bit of sense.

 

[Aqueous Id]

wellwisher,

Why should we take genesis as ''symbolic''?

Because there is evidence that it borrows symbols from other cultures. So, for the same reason you should not take as literal that Gilgamesh thatched a boat out of reeds to save all the species from the Flood, a legend that predates the Bible, you would not regard the Noah story as literal.

Do you not agree that the existence of a precursor from another culture explains that the story was merely incorporated? There are a lot of examples.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Arioch,

You have argued for your subjective interpretation of Genesis...

What is ''subjective'' about using the correct meanings of words?

...by saying that because it makes sense that must be the right way to interpret it(you've said so at least three times in this thread), claiming that without your artificial make/create dichotomy the book doesn't make sense.

Same as above using ''artificial''.

However if that is the criteria you are using, and you've said so yourself, then you must also accept that my interpretation of Genesis as a myth is just as valid, if not more so because it works with the rest of the bible as well.

Your interpretation renders Genesis nonsensical.
Why should anyone accept that?

You also never answered my question about the six days the bible said god created the world in. Care to weigh in on that finally, or are you just going to dodge the question again?

It doesn't say ''God created the world in six days'', it says He created it ''In the begining...''
''Yowm'' is the word used for day, which also means ''as a division of time''

No, one has to scrap the text and write something that makes the least bit of sense.

That's nonsense.


jan.

 

[Arioch]

@Jan --

It doesn't say ''God created the world in six days'', it says He created it ''In the begining...''
''Yowm'' is the word used for day, which also means ''as a division of time''

Yes, it does. The word in context can only be defined as a day because, in context, the bible also says that each day had a "morning" and "night". Therefore it says that god created the world in six days. QED.

 

[Jan Ardena]

@Jan --



Yes, it does. The word in context can only be defined as a day because, in context, the bible also says that each day had a "morning" and "night". Therefore it says that god created the world in six days. QED.

God didn't create ''bara'' anything in those days.
He even made ''asah'' man, but created them in His own image.

It say's He created ''bara'' the earth ''In the begining''.


Jan.

 

[Robittybob1]

@Jan --



Yes, it does. The word in context can only be defined as a day because, in context, the bible also says that each day had a "morning" and "night". Therefore it says that god created the world in six days. QED.

I was trying to say, and I don't believe it is an insane assertion, that atheists should not get upset if another person attempts to "rewrite" Genesis yet appears to not follow the order in the "old Version" or the absolute correct translation.

 

[NMSquirrel]

one has to scrap the text and write something that makes the least bit of sense.

In the beginning,God created the Void, He saw that it was not good,so he created a pill that contained everything that was needed to create the universe,when he was done with this pill,he blew it up, and the universe was born.....

 

[Arioch]

@Jan --

God didn't create ''bara'' anything in those days.
He even made ''asah'' man, but created them in His own image.

It say's He created ''bara'' the earth ''In the begining''.

You have mastered the art of the red herring. This is literally completely irrelevant. Whether it says he created it or made it(never mind that even in the ancient hebrew the words were synonymous) it says that he did it in six days. And due to the context the word was used in we know that it means a standard, twenty four hour day.

You know damn well that was the point I was getting at. We know for a fact that it took longer than that, and we know that it didn't happen in the order that the bible says it did. This would seem to be a major conflict with about six different sciences there. Either explain how it's not or concede the point that a literal Genesis can't be true.

 

[Robittybob1]

Waiting for Jan!

 

[Arioch]

@Rob --

Don't hold your breath, Jan will just deflect with yet another red herring, degrading her credibility even further.

 

[James R]

Jan's a man.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Oops!

 

[Jan Ardena]

Arioch,

You have mastered the art of the red herring. This is literally completely irrelevant. Whether it says he created it or made it(never mind that even in the ancient hebrew the words were synonymous) it says that he did it in six days. And due to the context the word was used in we know that it means a standard, twenty four hour day.

What exactly did He do in six days?

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.


Gen 1:6 ¶ And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.


Gen 1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which [were] under the firmament from the waters which [were] above the firmament: and it was so.


Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.


Gen 1:9 ¶ And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry [land] appear: and it was so.


Gen 1:10 And God called the dry [land] Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that [it was] good.


Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, [and] the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed [is] in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.


Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, [and] herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed [was] in itself, after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.


Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.


Gen 1:14 ¶ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:


Gen 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.


Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: [he made] the stars also.


Gen 1:17

And God set them

in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,


Gen 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that [it was] good.


Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.


Gen 1:20 ¶ And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl [that] may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.


Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.


Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.


Gen 1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.


Gen 1:24 ¶ And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.


Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.


Gen 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.


Gen 1:27 So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

He created water creatures, man in His own image, and winged fowl.

''In the begining'' He created the heavens and the earth.
That's what it says.

You know damn well that was the point I was getting at. We know for a fact that it took longer than that, and we know that it didn't happen in the order that the bible says it did.

Read above.

This would seem to be a major conflict with about six different sciences there. Either explain how it's not or concede the point that a literal Genesis can't be true.

If you read it literally, it's NOT in conflict with science.
I haven't said Genesis is true, or false for that matter.


jan.

 

[Arioch]

@Jan --

What exactly did He do in six days?

Everything in your list, but we know that it didn't happen in six days, it happened over the course of billions of years. Not only that but the order is wrong. It says that plant life was the first life created/made when we know that the first life was not plants, it was small, microbial replicators in the seas. It also says that god created/made the stars after he created/made the earth, we know this to be the complete reverse of what actually happened, the stars predate the Earth by a good five to ten billion years.

''In the begining'' He created the heavens and the earth.
That's what it says.

And then,

"Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day."

"Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day."

So everything that happened between those two verse happened in one day. Stop with the red herrings already and answer the question.

If you read it literally, it's NOT in conflict with science.

Really? So grass predates sea life? Care to cite some peer reviewed articles stating that? Or are you just going to deflect as usual?

(PS, sorry about the "her" thing. It's the name, I don't know anyone named Jan who isn't a woman. I apologize for that)

 

[Jan Ardena]

Arioch,

Everything in your list, but we know that it didn't happen in six days, it happened over the course of billions of years.

Disbelieve the texts all you want, it is no concern of mine.

Not only that but the order is wrong. It says that plant life was the first life created/made when we know that the first life was not plants, it was small, microbial replicators in the seas.

1. ''Bara'' band ''Asah'' (''created/made'') have two different meanings (Hebrew).

2. It doesn't say they were created (Bara) it says;

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, [and] the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed [is] in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Notice it says, And the earth was without form, and void.
Form-less, not seed-less, or devoid of potential.
Not to mention that it gives an idea of when the Earth and Heavens were created which was ''In the begining...''.

It also says that god created/made the stars after he created/made the earth, we know this to be the complete reverse of what actually happened, the stars predate the Earth by a good five to ten billion years.

It uses the term ''Asah'' not ''Bara'' in relation to the stars, these two words mean completely different things. Have you not read the evidence?
One assumes that the creation (Bara) took place ''In the begining'', just like it says.

There is evidence within the texts that the earth existed before the 6 days account.

Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.... Now in case you say ''replenish'' just simply means ''to fill'', consider what God says to Noah after the flood:

Gen 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.


Also:


Gen 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

The word ''land'' in this instance is transliterated from the Hebrew word

''erets''

, and one of its meaning is ''country.


Now, the following verse states:


Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.


Unless Cain builded a city with his own bare hands, there had to be people there.
Unless you believe that humans engaged in incest, and Cain waited a number of years for a sister to grow, and decided (for whatever strange reason) to go to the land of Nod . then there had to be people there.

And then,

"Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day."

"Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day."

So everything that happened between those two verse happened in one day. Stop with the red herrings already and answer the question.

Nothing happened between those two verses as they are the same verse.

Really? So grass predates sea life? Care to cite some peer reviewed articles stating that? Or are you just going to deflect as usual?

Are you actually reading the words that I write?

(PS, sorry about the "her" thing. It's the name, I don't know anyone named Jan who isn't a woman. I apologize for that)

''Jan'' is a Dutch male name pronounced as ''yan''.

But don't worry, it's understandable.


jan.

 

[Lee]

Sigh. String theory now postulates 11 dimensions. Actually, there are thousads if not millions. Some of these coexist on the same "plane" or level we are on, and some are higher, some lower. But as our consciousness is imortal and indestructable, this consciousness does not require the earth, the sun, or even this specific event of creation for it to exist. "Us" in the eternal sense. The reason about 95% of the people believe in a higher power is that we are connected to it and 95% of the population is intuitive enough to realize it. But to digress, as I love humor. Belief is reasonable as we are part of that supreme consciousness. Agnosticism is reasonable, as most people cannot see the miraculous in front of them. Athiesm is just stupid, cause its a lose lose so only morons buy into it. (God's morons as everything is proceesing just as it should.) Ah well. Even if you believe, your in for a big surprise.

 

[Lee]

A Day in the Sight of God

Just one more, can't resist. Somebody asked my master "What is a day in the sight of God?". As this is unanswerable at this level of consciousness, Master replied (and this is gospel in Hindu Mythology, and true nonetheless): "When Brahma exhales, all the universes are created. When Brahma inhales, all the universes are destroyed. How long is a breath compared to a day?" If the known universe (92 billion light year diameter) is as an atom to the actual size, and this is one of thousands of realities (dimensions) and one of millions of universes, then of what importance is an old jewish lymric trying to express the unknowable?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Just one more, can't resist. Somebody asked my master "What is a day in the sight of God?". As this is unanswerable at this level of consciousness, Master replied (and this is gospel in Hindu Mythology, and true nonetheless): "When Brahma exhales, all the universes are created. When Brahma inhales, all the universes are destroyed. How long is a breath compared to a day?" If the known universe (92 billion light year diameter) is as an atom to the actual size, and this is one of thousands of realities (dimensions) and one of millions of universes, then of what importance is an old jewish lymric trying to express the unknowable?

What is your view of the topic of genesis?


jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Actually, there are thousads if not millions.

Huh?

Some of these coexist on the same "plane" or level we are on, and some are higher, some lower.

Evidence please.

But as our consciousness is imortal and indestructable, this consciousness does not require the earth, the sun, or even this specific event of creation for it to exist.

Evidence please.

The reason about 95% of the people believe in a higher power is that we are connected to it and 95% of the population is intuitive enough to realize it.

Supposition.

Belief is reasonable as we are part of that supreme consciousness.

Evidence please.

Agnosticism is reasonable, as most people cannot see the miraculous in front of them. Athiesm is just stupid

Maybe, before you start throwing those terms around as loosely as you're doing, you should take the time to learn what they mean.

Even if you believe, your in for a big surprise.

Yeah? Unexpected birthday present?

 

[AlexG]

Standard Believer New Age garbage