Posted on 09/21/2009 7:39:20 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Genesis: Real, Reliable, Historical
by Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D.*
Introduction to (new book entitled) Earth's Catastrophic Past
Why Take Genesis Seriously?
The first eleven chapters of the Bible have been relegated by many to the category of myths, not real history. These are said to contain spiritual truth, but they cannot be taken seriously as records of real people and events. Many sincere Christians who believe the Bible do not know what their pastors believe about the historicity of Genesis. Is it safe to assume that these believe in the following truths?
1. God created everything in six 24-hour days.
2 Adam and Eve were real people.
3. God cursed a perfect world as a judgment for sin.
4. Noah constructed an Ark by which two of every kind of air-breathing, land-dwelling animal were saved along with Noah's family from a global flood.
5. The confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel produced the language groups that are found around the world today.
An alarming number of Christian leaders and teachers instead believe that God "created" through evolutionary processes over millions of years, that Adam and Eve descended from a hominid population, and that there has never been a global flood, suggesting that the account of Noah and the Ark is a story adapted from a Babylonian myth.
Mainstream Christian orthodoxy regarded the opening chapters of Genesis as just as real and reliable as the rest of the Bible until 150-200 years ago. So what has happened?...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
I grew up believing in a six-day period. I grew up believing in Noah’s flood. And etc, etc!!! I even went to a Christian university.
I have asked for solid physical evidence of such and I was told to go read a book that I have already partially read many years ago and people asking me what I know.
You are the one that brought this subject up and so, by simple logic, you should be more than willing to defend your beliefs. And one doesn’t defend ones beliefs by attacking or denigrating another’s belief. You can’t show that you are right by trying to show that I am wrong.
Where is the physical evidence?
Where would you like to begin. How about we start with Genesis 1, and go from there?
I’m all ears.
See my post at no. 16. It seems to me that people pick and choose which parts of the Bible to take literally depending on whatever backs up what they want to believe is true.
Ok, what types of evidence do you think we should we be looking for if the Universe is young?
THANKS.
Barack, it that you?
Actually, if you approach the Bible like any other kind of literature you will see that there are books that are intended to be poetic and/or symbolic. Others are not (like Paul's epistles for example although he, too, uses metaphors from time to time).
You need to approach it with logic. When Jesus says, "I am the door" he's obviously not referring to Himself as a wooden slab with a knob. It's a metaphor to relate a spiriual idea. But when Paul addresses his letter "To the Colossians" one can infer that he literally wrote a letter to those who lived in Colossae.
There are many passages in Genesis that seem to obvious in their literal nature. For example...the story of Abraham. There's no indication that the writer of Genesis believed anything other than that Abraham, or Joseph, or Adam were real men.
As to the first chapters of Genesis...I understand that some people look at these as poetic literature. I see no indication that they were not intended by the writer to be as forthright as the story of Abraham. True, our finite minds may not be able to grasp the ideas, but that doesn't mean that God is not able to perform the acts just as they are recounted, for he is God.
T Minus Four
Two other books on the subject, both by Prof. Gerald L. Schroeder: “Genesis and the Big Bang” and “The Science of GOD”
How about samples of uranium ore exhibiting only 6,000 years of decay. It should be almost totally free of any intermediate transuranics or lead.
My pleasure ;o)
But then where is any indication that John meant anything other than what he literally saw in Revelation or where is there any indication that Adam/Eve is not meant to be poetic metaphor? I don’t mean to sound harsh but I think taking the Bible too literally cheapens the deep and profound lessons and wisdom that are contained in it.
Jesus believed in Noah.
Which parts of the Bible are we to take literal and which parts are we not to take literal? Who is to tell us the difference? Is it some preacher?? If so, who taught that preacher the correct way to interpret the Bible? I’ve seen preachers in the same congregation teach things that contradict each other? If preachers who have studied the Bibles for years and been educated in seminaries and theological universities can’t agree on how to interpret the Bible, why should we trust them?
I have also been told to just read the Bible and God will interpret it for me or I’m told that the Bible will interpret itself. I have read the Bible, several times and when I come up with an interpretation that differs from mainstream Christianity, I am told that I received my inspiration from the devil. That’s great. I follow the instructions, but when the results come out differently from what is expected by somebody else who isn’t God, then I am told that I’m wrong and if I don’t change my evil ways, then I’m going to Hell. That sounds just like Carter telling me if I disagree with Obama, then I’m a racist.
God didn’t tell me I’m wrong, some person who think they are speaking for God in this instance, is telling me. Why should I trust that person? The Lord didn’t tell me to trust that person.
GGG asked: “Ok, what types of evidence do you think we should we be looking for if the Universe is young?”
I say: “You tell me, but I think that there should be no evidence that the Universe is old.”
OK, since you want to put it that way, what evidence do you think suggests the Universe is old?
“Why is this alarming? Since these interpretations are accepted by the Catholic Church clearly the vast majority of the world’s Christians believe this.”
Where do you guys get your talking points? Blah, blah blah... broken records. And you all spout this nonsense as if you had an original thought in your under-evolutionized Brontosaurus-sized (to scale, of course) brains. If you’re science is as informed as your suppositions about Christian beliefs then it’s no wonder you swallow Darwin’s science fiction hook, line and stinker.
In short, your babblings are maddening.
Context is king. There are different genres within the Bible. One does not pick and choose. If you read the text within context, asking who, what, when, where, why and how, one should be able to ascertain what the text is saying without having to “add” to the meaning.
I feel your pain. I was recently verbally attacked and insulted by a friend of a relative who who proceeded to tell me that I’m going to hell and that I never did anything good in my life, etc. etc. All because I didn’t believe the literal text of the Bible. This was told to me sitting in the dining room of the house that I bought for my parents and sibling and after I’d mentioned how much of my income goes to charities etc. The usual stuff.
Then I said that I believed most people DON’T believe in God even if they think they do, because believing means that you’re absolutely sure and no one ever is. You can imagine what followed that! LOL
Why are you asking me? You came on stating things as facts and all I want you to present any physical evidence of the truthfulness of these facts and then we can discuss it. Is that asking too much? You decide the agenda and where it leads.
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.