Examining Genesis...

ToxicReboMan · #1 12th June 2009, 08:08 AM

TEs argue that not all of Genesis is meant to be taken literally. How does one know which parts of Genesis to take literally and which parts to take figuratively? Where in Genesis does the metaphorical passages end and the literal passages begin?

gluadys · #2 12th June 2009, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by ToxicReboMan

TEs argue that not all of Genesis is meant to be taken literally. How does one know which parts of Genesis to take literally and which parts to take figuratively? Where in Genesis does the metaphorical passages end and the literal passages begin?

Everywhere.

An Arch Angel · #3 12th June 2009, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by ToxicReboMan

TEs argue that not all of Genesis is meant to be taken literally. How does one know which parts of Genesis to take literally and which parts to take figuratively? Where in Genesis does the metaphorical passages end and the literal passages begin?

Well,

If you believe god created the universe you can take it all literal. God created the universe. Today we know how, back then, they did not.

God created man. The Church Fathers made the creation story short to try and help later generations see that the bible is not the book for studying creation, but rather a book to be studied for the improvement of one’s treatment of their fellow man. The RC never intended for Luther to come along and change the bible to the sole source of God’s word. How could they anticipate that event, never in anybody’s right mind, could they think that god does not speak to us in many ways.

Noah’s flood happened, it just did not cover the surface of planet Earth. Like the Mississippi flood in the USA, to a smaller population living along the river it would have seemed that the whole world flooded. Add that to the practices of passing stories down through word of mouth one can easily see why the story is what it is.

The similarities in the stories around the world can be understood best when you understand that people’s of that time lived by rivers. Water ways were the primary transportation mechanism for many people of that time. Many rivers flood, many people lived through various flood, all the rivers have big floods at one point or another.

Sodom and Gomorrah were cities that were around for a long time, and then one day, or through a series of events, were destroyed. You may believe in these events to be from god or not. The fact remains they were destroyed.

The Bible purpose really picks up at Cane&Able. It shows us how we can treat each other if we lose focus on God. It tries and teaches us how to be more “Human”.

Jesus said, give the Roman’s what is Roman, well give science what is science. Science tells us how god did it. The main purpose of the bible is not science, math, or even cooking.

The purpose of the bible answer’s those age old questions “who am I” “what are we”. From loving compassionate people to daughters that rape their father, we are it all. Also it teaches us how to treat each other. Weather you believe or not, the main question after the reading of the bible is ‘what does it mean to you?” and then “How can we help each other to be better people”.

Mallon · #4 12th June 2009, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by ToxicReboMan

TEs argue that not all of Genesis is meant to be taken literally. How does one know which parts of Genesis to take literally and which parts to take figuratively? Where in Genesis does the metaphorical passages end and the literal passages begin?

Neocreationists don't take all of Genesis literally, either, so you had might as well ask them the same thing.

shernren · #5 13th June 2009, 09:35 AM

Origen knew how.

And who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars?
- Origen, 215AD [De Principiis 4.1.16]

ToxicReboMan · #6 13th June 2009, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by gluadys

Everywhere.

Care to elaborate?

ToxicReboMan · #7 13th June 2009, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by An Arch Angel

Well,

If you believe god created the universe you can take it all literal. God created the universe. Today we know how, back then, they did not.

God created man. The Church Fathers made the creation story short to try and help later generations see that the bible is not the book for studying creation, but rather a book to be studied for the improvement of one’s treatment of their fellow man. The RC never intended for Luther to come along and change the bible to the sole source of God’s word. How could they anticipate that event, never in anybody’s right mind, could they think that god does not speak to us in many ways.

Noah’s flood happened, it just did not cover the surface of planet Earth. Like the Mississippi flood in the USA, to a smaller population living along the river it would have seemed that the whole world flooded. Add that to the practices of passing stories down through word of mouth one can easily see why the story is what it is.

The similarities in the stories around the world can be understood best when you understand that people’s of that time lived by rivers. Water ways were the primary transportation mechanism for many people of that time. Many rivers flood, many people lived through various flood, all the rivers have big floods at one point or another.

Sodom and Gomorrah were cities that were around for a long time, and then one day, or through a series of events, were destroyed. You may believe in these events to be from god or not. The fact remains they were destroyed.

The Bible purpose really picks up at Cane&Able. It shows us how we can treat each other if we lose focus on God. It tries and teaches us how to be more “Human”.

Jesus said, give the Roman’s what is Roman, well give science what is science. Science tells us how god did it. The main purpose of the bible is not science, math, or even cooking.

The purpose of the bible answer’s those age old questions “who am I” “what are we”. From loving compassionate people to daughters that rape their father, we are it all. Also it teaches us how to treat each other. Weather you believe or not, the main question after the reading of the bible is ‘what does it mean to you?” and then “How can we help each other to be better people”.

That's great and all, but you didn't even answer the question. You just gave your viewpoint which didn't answer the question whatsoever.

ToxicReboMan · #8 13th June 2009, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Mallon

Neocreationists don't take all of Genesis literally, either, so you had might as well ask them the same thing.

If you don't want to answer the question, then why even respond? I mean, was there something wrong with my question or how I asked it?

ToxicReboMan · #9 13th June 2009, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by shernren

Origen knew how.

And who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars?
- Origen, 215AD [De Principiis 4.1.16]

This is an answer to some other question. Not mine. A lot of dodging going on around here.

Mallon · #10 13th June 2009, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by ToxicReboMan

If you don't want to answer the question, then why even respond? I mean, was there something wrong with my question or how I asked it?

Yes. Your question supposes that evolutionary creationists are the only ones who don't read Genesis as an entirely literal, historical account. We aren't. NO Christian reads Genesis as an entirely literal, historical account. So your question should be directed, not at evolutionary creationists specifically, but at Christians as a whole (including yourself!).
Where do you draw the line between scientific concordism and accommodationism in Genesis, ToxicReboMan? Many evolutionary creationists I know would argue that Genesis 1-11 should be understood in the context of an accommodationist framework, with history phased in throughout.