Posted on 01/22/2006 8:12:41 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez
Creationists call us to believe the Biblical creation story as a literal account of historical events. However, Genesis contains two distinctly different creation accounts. Which creation story are they calling us to "literally" believe?
For generations, serious students of Scripture have noted stark divisions and variations in the age of the Hebrew, its style and language within Genesis. As we have it now, Genesis is actually a composite of three written primary sources, each with its own character, favorite words and distinctly different names for God. Such differences all but evaporate when translated into English, but they are clear in the ancient Hebrew text.
The first creation account, Genesis. 1:1 to Genesis. 2:4a, was written during or after the Jews' Babylonian captivity. This fully developed story explains creation in terms of the ancient near eastern world view of its time. A watery chaos is divided by the dome (firmament) of the sky. The waters under the dome are gathered and land appears. Lights are affixed in the dome. All living things are created. The story pictures God building the cosmos as a supporting ecosystem for humanity. Finally, humanity, both male and female, is created, and God rests.
The second Creation story, Genesis 2:4b to 2:25, found its written form several centuries before the Genesis. 1:1 story. This text is a less developed and much older story. It was probably passed down for generations around the camp fires of desert dwellers before being written. It begins by describing a desert landscape, no plants or herbs, no rain; only a mist arises out of the earth. Then the Lord God forms man of the dust of the ground, creates an oasis-like Garden of Eden to support the "man whom he had formed." In this story, God creates animal life while trying to provide the man "a helper fit for him." None being found, God takes a rib from the man's side and creates the first woman. These two creation stories clearly arise out of different histories and reflect different concerns with different sequences of events. Can they either or both be literal history? Obviously not.
Many serious students of Scripture consider the first eleven chapters of Genesis as non-literal, pre-history type literature, with Abram in Genesis. 12:1 being the first literal historical figure in the Bible. This understanding of Genesis causes an uproar in some quarters. In most church communities, little of this textual study has filtered down to the pew. But, in their professional training, vast numbers of clergy have been exposed to this type of literary scriptural analysis.
In my over 28 years as a pastor, I have encountered many people who are unnecessarily conflicted because they have been made to believe that, to be faithfully religious, one must take a literal view of the Genesis creation accounts. Faced with their scientific understandings going one direction and their spiritual search another, many have felt compelled to give up their spiritual search altogether. This all too common reaction is an unnecessary shame!
So, the next time someone asks you if you believe the Biblical story of creation, just remember the correct reply: "To which Biblical creation story do you refer?"
What missionaries are they? I'm not familiar with missionaries that teach Christianity apart from its foundation.
I'm sure there are evangelists that look at conversions as notches on their Bible, leaving them to wilt after gaining a decision. Christ orders his people to make disciples, not converts.
You might think there is time, but that is a contrary to fact assertion as the Gospels cannot be understood apart from the OT. One can gain some insight by knowing the Pauline letters, but apart from the OT the Gospels are a familiar tune with unknown lyrics.
I had a little smiley...
Is it a denial of the core of the internal combustion engine to cool it with water?
Basically a Christian can err about a lot of different doctrines and still be a Christian. The key belief comes down to a faith in God and in His work of salvation through Jesus to redeem us of our sins.
Faith and belief are not the same thing. As I've heard it put in the past, belief knows that chair will support my weight, faith actually sits in the chair.
Puts the question of playing outhouse attorney with Scripture in rather a different light, don't you think? Belief tries to reconcile popular culture to Christianity. Faith departs from popular culture where it conflicts with Christianity.
Personal attacks on people not present and able to defend themselves when opinions on religious matters differ seems to be a staple with some Christians.
Sort of like a slap the other cheek commandment.
Given what I posted, how do you equate belief in the FSM with belief in God the Creator?
There is no evidence for the FSM...As such, it would not be rational to believe in, or have faith in, the FSM.
However, as I noted previously, there are external evidences for the existence of God the Creator (Scripture, Manuscripts, Archeology and Fulfilled Prophecy).
You are comparing apples and oranges here. You can't replace God the Creator with the FSM without evidence.
Where is your evidence? What is the root of your faith in the FSM?
I'm a deist. I believe that Nature's God created the universe. However, I do not believe in divine revelation, i.e. the creationist bilge one finds in Genesis.
You already posted something that wasn't cogent and coherent...Isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black?
In John 5:46&47 Jesus said, "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?"
What did Moses write about Jesus?
Do you believe what Moses wrote about Jesus?
Why don't you believe that the creation event in Genesis is literal?
The Genesis creation event, along with Genesis chapters 1-11, are referenced, as literal, more than a few hundred times by New Testament writers and also by Jesus himself.
The Bible says that Adam was created on the sixth day not the third as you stated.
What is your evidence for your belief against divine revelation?
If you don't believe in divine revelation, then how do you account for the thousands of fufilled prophecies in the Bible?
What are the evidences for your faith in deism and your faith against divine revelation?
Apart from divine revelation...How do you account for the thousands of fullfilled prophecies in the Bible?
Are you going to open the gate quickly and let these out or are you going to answer the questions and provide the evidences for your faith?
DNA says it is impossible for all human beings to have come from just two fully grown flesh beings. The Bible does not describe a miracle of different peoples, yet the Heavenly Father called his creation GOOD!
Now I know most Christians are told WHAT to think about WHAT is written but think about it.
Around this globe today there are many different peoples. Are they/we here by accident, divine DNA planting, or do you ascribe to a speedy form of evolution. Common sense says there has to be a specific explanation for what we see today, what is it?
NO I do not believe in evolution. I believe that the Heavenly Father formed each of his children and as He said, His creation was GOOD!
My belief in deism is based on reason.
With respect to divine revelation, it is not my burden to disprove the absurd.
Thousands of fulfilled biblical prophecies? LOL. Vague prophetical ramblings can be interpreted after the fact to have predicted just about anything. Nostradamus' prophecies are just as accurate as biblical prophecies, i.e. not very.
Perhaps you could enlighten us on one of these vague prophetic ramblings. Do you have one in mind that is largely accepted by Christians?
Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.