Lets take Genesis literally

ThePhoenix · #1 16th February 2004, 06:55 PM

I am reading, and reposting parts of genesis, that if you take the bible literally you must accept. If the genesis account is literal, then these are true.

Genesis 1 6-8 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning-the second day.

So the stuff above the sky is water.

Genesis 1:9-10

And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 2:4-6

When the Lord God made the earth and the heavens- and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground

Well this is just a little contradictory. Did the land come first, or the water?

Genesis 1:27

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

Genesis 2:5

the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Genesis 2:20-22

But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

Well this is contradictory again. How was man created? How am I supposed to take this literally, when there's so many contradictions?

Bushido216 · #2 16th February 2004, 07:48 PM

Shut off your logical processes.

lucaspa · #3 17th February 2004, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by ThePhoenix

How am I supposed to take this literally, when there's so many contradictions?

Which is part of the reason that people concluded that there were two different creation stories, from two separate traditions.

BTW, you forgot Genesis 2:4b, where it tells us that the heavens and the earth were created "in the day" after just telling us in Genesis 1 that it took 6 days.

If you want to show the absurdity of taking the whole Bible literally, I suggest you do some reading in Job. I want to see the gates behind which the seas are kept.

ThePhoenix · #4 17th February 2004, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by lucaspa

Which is part of the reason that people concluded that there were two different creation stories, from two separate traditions.

BTW, you forgot Genesis 2:4b, where it tells us that the heavens and the earth were created "in the day" after just telling us in Genesis 1 that it took 6 days.

If you want to show the absurdity of taking the whole Bible literally, I suggest you do some reading in Job. I want to see the gates behind which the seas are kept.

Overused, unfortunately. I just wanted to take new stuff, to prove that there is no particular need for TEs to recycle arguements.

lucaspa · #5 17th February 2004, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by ThePhoenix

Overused, unfortunately. I just wanted to take new stuff, to prove that there is no particular need for TEs to recycle arguements.

Ah, but so far it is an unanswered argument.

However, if you want literal, remember that "elohim" is literally "gods", plural, in Hebrew. So, wouldn't a Biblical literalist have to read Genesis 1 as creation by committee?

Henhouse · #6 17th February 2004, 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by ThePhoenix

I am reading, and reposting parts of genesis, that if you take the bible literally you must accept. If the genesis account is literal, then these are true.

So the stuff above the sky is water.

Genesis 1:9-10 Genesis 2:4-6 Well this is just a little contradictory. Did the land come first, or the water?

Genesis 1:27 Genesis 2:5 Genesis 2:20-22 Well this is contradictory again. How was man created? How am I supposed to take this literally, when there's so many contradictions?

Give me a minute, I'm trying to think of how to answer without being rude.........................

Okay, better now.

Yes, there WAS (past tense) water above the sky, until the flood, when it all came down.

The water was first, then the land, then mists to water the land (instead of rain).

God made Adam (mankind), then seperated him into male and female. "It is not good for man to be alone (all one)."

I'm having a hard time seeing a problem or contradiction with your quotes.

ThePhoenix · #7 18th February 2004, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Henhouse

Give me a minute, I'm trying to think of how to answer without being rude.........................

Okay, better now.

Yes, there WAS (past tense) water above the sky, until the flood, when it all came down.

The water was first, then the land, then mists to water the land (instead of rain).

God made Adam (mankind), then seperated him into male and female. "It is not good for man to be alone (all one)."

I'm having a hard time seeing a problem or contradiction with your quotes.

It says "male and female he created them." So if he just created Adam, then how do you reconcile that with the creation of men and women at the same time, as outlined in Genesis 1?

Also it does not say that mists came down over the earth. It says streams came up from the ground, which was apparently submerged, yet somehow dry.

Bushido216 · #8 18th February 2004, 11:08 AM

Just remember, there is no spoon.

lucaspa · #9 18th February 2004, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by Henhouse

Yes, there WAS (past tense) water above the sky, until the flood, when it all came down.

1. What held the water up?
2. What would such an amount of water have done to the temperature of the earth?
3. Where did all the water go?

God made Adam (mankind), then seperated him into male and female. "It is not good for man to be alone (all one)."

Adam was separated? You mean he was both male and female at one time? A hermaphrodite? WOW! Never saw that in the Bible before.

[quote]The water was first, then the land, then mists to water the land (instead of rain).[quote]
Genesis 2:4 When the Lord God made the earth, there were no plants on the earth and no seeds had sprouted, because he had not sent any rain, and there was no one to cultivate the land; but water would come up from beneath the surface and water the ground."

Genesis 1:11 "Then he commanded, "Let the earth produce all kinds of plants, those that bear grain and those that bear fruit" and it was done. So the earth produced all kinds of plants, and God saw that it was good."

Henhouse · #10 18th February 2004, 05:47 PM

It seems to me that we are all going full speed, but not necessarily on the same train tracks. THerefore I will try to refrain from debating in this forum.