Should Genesis be taken literally?

[Archivist]

Nobody who understands the Bible believes this.
Nobody who can read objectively concludes this.

Well, I think I have a pretty good understanding of the Bible, and I believe there are two differing creation accounts. And guess what, I can actually read objectively and I have reached this conclusion.

 

[dannheim]

Misleading, of course. You give the reader the impression that the virtually unanimous agreement among the experts is arbitrary, or without underlying justification. But that is simply not true - the theory of evolution did not attain its status as "fact" (as that term is normally used) by some kind of "vote". No - the theory was developed through the rigorous process of vetting and skeptical inquiry that underlies the scientific enterprise.

I guess you missed my point. I should have been more clear. You cannot use science to argue matters of the supernatural. Science will always win since by its very nature excludes anything that cannot be observed.

Let's take the concept of salvation
Salvation is supernatural. If we count on our reasoning ability to convince skeptics, we will be discouraged. That applies to our own hearts as well. If we depend on evidences outside the Bible to strengthen our faith, we can be shaken every time another argument comes along that seems to undermine the Bible.

We need to make sure our trust rests in the God who gave us Scripture, not human arguments that question His Word. Knowledge begins with the fear of God and His Word. A person who knows the risen Christ as Creator and Savior does not need a constant stream of scientific evidence to keep his faith. We need to trust in Jesus Christ, not our own reasoning.

 

[expos4ever]

I guess you missed my point. I should have been more clear. You cannot use science to argue matters of the supernatural.......

I certainly agree with some of what you wrote, but I don't see the connection to the matter at issue, which has become a discussion of the theory of evolution. Evolution is a fact (in the sense that we normally use that term). And there is no point in fighting against facts - the facts always win.

 

[The Times]

Genesis is the history of Israel's roots...most believe Moses to be the author of the book, and if we go by the chronology from Genesis to Exodus, he wouldn't have been born until a couple thousand years after the account of Adam. Prior to this, these stories would have been handed down through oral tradition.

It describes in detail the beginning and fall of humanity, which is the underlying theme. In short Genesis is Not about the history of Israel, the Chronicles are. This is why Liberal thinkers are so easy to dismiss all 66 books of the Holy Bible, starting from the Genesis account, by trying to break it into pieces and attach to it a narrative that they want to propagate. As we have seen in Lamestream Media, this false narrative is nothing but fake news.

Liberal destruction of Biblical context as a historical book of events that happened is nothing more than a fake narrative embellished within their own minds to discourage people from the truth of God.

So, is it possible that this is what happened with Genesis? That after years of oral tradition some of the "facts" changed? I'm not saying this as a dig at creationism, or anything like that. Nor am I saying that there is no truth to be found in Genesis...I believe it paints a beautiful picture of creation, of God's desire to have a relationship with His people, of man's biggest obstacle to overcome being his sinful nature, and how the foundation was being laid for the Christ.

Again this is nonsense, The Genesis account is a historical account that has stood the test of time, in the same way the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus has stood the test of time. To question its accuracy is to have a swipe at God's character, by implying that his Holy Word is untrustworthy. To me personally this attitude towards the Holy Bible is blasphemous. Liberal thinkers obviously think of God's Holy Word like the story of the outlaw Jesse James. Do you see how they try to program people to indirectly put labels on people who take God's word to heart and who obey it to the Jot and tittle.

 

[expos4ever]

This is why Liberal thinkers are so easy to dismiss all 66 books of the Holy Bible, starting from the Genesis account, by trying to break it into pieces and attach to it a narrative that they want to propagate. As we have seen in Lamestream Media, this false narrative is nothing but fake news.

Liberal destruction of Biblical context as a historical book of events that happened is nothing more than a fake narrative embellished within their own minds to discourage people from the truth of God.

This is basically a set of speculations couched in dismissive language - what facts, what credible evidence do you have for any of this?

And how do you know that the Genesis account is not a form of divinely inspired myth? This question keeps getting asked, but I see no substantive answers.

 

[Archivist]

Again this is nonsense, The Genesis account is a historical account that has stood the test of time, in the same way the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus has stood the test of time. To question its accuracy is to have a swipe at God's character, by implying that his Holy Word is untrustworthy. To me personally this attitude towards the Holy Bible is blasphemous. Liberal thinkers obviously think of God's Holy Word like the story of the outlaw Jesse James. Do you see how they try to program people to indirectly put labels on people who take God's word to heart and who obey it to the Jot and tittle.

Or it could be an allegory...

 

[expos4ever]

Or it could be an allegory...

Ya think?

.......(I trust you understand I am agreeing with you)

 

[DingDing]

Oh please. To say that evolution is not science is dishonest at worst, ignorant at least.

Then call me both dishonest and ignorant.

 

[dannheim]

Again evolution is not a fact. I do not care what Scientific American has to say about it in their editorial(opinion) regarding creationist scientists
I do agree that natural selection is an observable fact and it also does not contradict the word of God.

 

[DingDing]

Wow...you're angry...

And, we're cousins!

Yea, probably angry, and sorry if you felt it was directed at you personally.

If we begin to assume that some portions of the bible are fable, then who decides, and what portions? I believe God wanted us to have His revelation of how things happened in the beginning. Not that this tells us all things that we might like to know, but God has decided what He feels is sufficient. I'm willing to go with God on this.

P.S. And Jessie James was my great-grandfather's uncle. (I am of Dalton decent.) Long live the Dalton gang.

 

[expos4ever]

Then call me both dishonest and ignorant.

Okey-dokey.

 

[expos4ever]

Again evolution is not a fact. I do not care what Scientific American has to say about it in their editorial(opinion) regarding creationist scientists.

Let me ask you a question: While you are free to believe what you like, does it not trouble you that you have to believe some rather implausible things to deny that evolution is a fact, namely (to repeat):

1. Tens of thousands of experts are all wrong;
2. Tens of thousands of experts are engaged in a conspiracy to propagate falsehood.

And do you not realize, that by dismissing the content of the Scientific American article, you are putting yourself in the position of not engaging a clear, well-articulated counter-argument to your position. And that will not score you any points with readers who may be on the fence on this issue.

 

[zoidar]

Evolution is not THE scientific view. It is just the most vocal of a certain method of interpreting evidence, as well as the most taught because they've managed to monopolize the education process and fill our heads at an early age with their way only.

Too many people fall for the "Evolution is true, because science" mantra. It's not real. It's a deception, and apparently a very good one. You eluded to it on your post, it takes one away from believing what God tells us. It's a modern day manifestation of the serpent saying, "Did God really say...?"

I don't know man. Maybe science is wrong about some (or all?) of the evolution parts. But to me it's not a very big problem with evolution. To me the message of mankind falling in sin and in need of a savior is the important part. One of the biggest problems for me about the literal interpretation is the dinosaurs. I don't know how do understand that part. It's hard for me to believe that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time. Maybe you can give me your view on this? I'm not all interested to convince you that the bible isn't to be taken literally ok, I'm just saying how I see it. I would like to see it literally if I could believe it like that, if you could give me what I feel is a reasonable explanation I would rather believe that.

The good part in all this is, you can be a believer in the literal translation or the more figurative translation and still be a follower of Christ.

 

[DingDing]

Let me ask you a question: While you are free to believe what you like, does it not trouble you that you have to believe some rather implausible things to deny that evolution is a fact, namely (to repeat):

1. Tens of thousands of experts are all wrong;
2. Tens of thousands of experts are engaged in a conspiracy to propagate falsehood.

...

But do consider, that if evolution is false, then God is true. So believe me, there is a very real bias among most "scientists" for evolution. (I take it that you have discounted creation science explanations. And if you have, on what basis have you done so? So, yes, I do believe as you said in point 2 above, "Tens of thousands of experts are engaged in a conspiracy to propagate falsehood.")

 

[The Times]

This is basically a set of speculations couched in dismissive language - what facts, what credible evidence do you have for any of this?

And how do you know that the Genesis account is not a form of divinely inspired myth? This question keeps getting asked, but I see no substantive answers.

God gave me a spirit of discernment to discern the ploys of the enemy. I don't need facts and credible evidence as you think it necessary, but all I need is to prove the intent of Liberal thinkers who try to discredit God's character, which is directly tied to his Holy Word, found only in the Holy Bible. So by exposing their intent, I have focussed people's attention to further scrutinise what the intended outcome that the Orginal Poster wants to achieve out of this.

I have done what I need to do, that is to expose the falsehood of liberal theology that has all the haul marks of an anti gospel narrative.

This is what one of the liberal heroes has to say about the word of God

1) Spong’s World View
Spong rejoices in uncertainty and the supposed relativity of all truth in Into the Whirlwind (ITW pp. 12 ff.). Also, in Resurrection: Myth or Reality? RMR (pp. 34–35) he claims:

No word is objective; hence no word ever passes from the lips of one person into the hearing of another without being changed in meaning. … Words are never the truth. They are only the medium of truth … Words become the vehicles by which experiences are shared.

Yet Spong wants us to believe that his words are true and that fundamentalists are most certainly wrong. Such absolute and certain statements sound strange from a bishop who condemns a church for prescribing certainty and absolutes. However, we must now look at why Spong thinks that the church has got it wrong and why liberal scholarship and morality is on the right track. To answer these questions, we must look at Spong’s world view.

So the original poster parrots his prodigy Bishop Spong as follows....

When stories are told from one generation to the next things change. Some things may be added, others taken away...things become embellished...that's just how it is. It doesn't mean that anyone is lying, necessarily, just that what we hear as a child and what we teach to our children about a subject may change slightly based on our recollection. And then there are those that like to add their own spin to make things more interesting, and it sticks...

Now here is the link exposing the cult of Liberal Theology......

What’s Wrong With Bishop Spong?

Watch the YouTube video by Walter Martin who exposes the cult of liberal theology, that denies the objective power of Jesus Christ as the Almighty God.

What liberal theology does is to try and deny the Genesis account and to deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, is so much to deny his deity as the God of the Holy Bible.

Do not believe one word they say...because to deny the Word of God is to infuse subject morality within an autonomous law society that is inclusive of all worldly sins because man is deity according to their anti gospel, in that man can wing salvation themselves by their own subjective morality.

That is why you see Liberals accepting homosexual sins, accepting transgender sins, and even embracing the defiling of God's image through the transhumanist agenda.

Walter Martin in one particular video between himself and Bishop Spong asked Spong if Jesus said something, do you accept Jesus as the final authority on any given issue?

Bishop Spong said no!

The cult of liberal theology is what is being promoted by the original Poster.

I don't need to prove anything, for the proof is in the pudding, but please don't eat their pudding, because it has a stench from here to heaven. Don't buy it, and certainly don't promote Liberal Theology subjective morality garbage that states that words don't mean what they mean from an objective context, rather they have only applied meaning subjectively and so every one can have a completely different views about morality and about God and still be saved and that's how they can all sing Gomba Yah together.

 

[expos4ever]

But do consider, that if evolution is false, then God is true.

Don't follow you. You appear to want to say "If you believe in evolution, you are denying something about God". Well, the obvious answer, as others have pointed out, is to simply propose that the creation account was never intended to be taken literally. I have yet to see a satisfactory explanation as to why that cannot be the case.

So believe me, there is a very real bias among most "scientists" for evolution.

You expect me (and others) to simply take your word re this rather implausible claim?

I do believe as you said in point 2 above, "Tens of thousands of experts are engaged in a conspiracy to propagate falsehood.")

Ok, at least you are willing to own the implications of your position.

 

[expos4ever]

God gave me a spirit of discernment to discern the ploys of the enemy. I don't need facts and credible evidence as you think it necessary,....

Well, I have to respect your guts in making the claiming that, unlike the rest of us mere mortals, you:

1. Have magical powers;
2. Need not concern yourselves with facts.

More later - I am sure there is a lot to say in response to your post.

 

[Speedwell]

God gave me a spirit of discernment to discern the ploys of the enemy. I don't need facts and credible evidence as you think it necessary, but all I need is to prove the intent of Liberal thinkers who try to discredit God's character, which is directly tied to his Holy Word, found only in the Holy Bible. So by exposing their intent, I have focussed people's attention to further scrutinise what the intended outcome that the Orginal Poster wants to achieve out of this.

I have done what I need to do, that is to expose the falsehood of liberal theology that has all the haul marks of an anti gospel narrative.

This is what one of the liberal heroes has to say about the word of God

1) Spong’s World View
Spong rejoices in uncertainty and the supposed relativity of all truth in Into the Whirlwind (ITW pp. 12 ff.). Also, in Resurrection: Myth or Reality? RMR (pp. 34–35) he claims:

No word is objective; hence no word ever passes from the lips of one person into the hearing of another without being changed in meaning. … Words are never the truth. They are only the medium of truth … Words become the vehicles by which experiences are shared.

Yet Spong wants us to believe that his words are true and that fundamentalists are most certainly wrong. Such absolute and certain statements sound strange from a bishop who condemns a church for prescribing certainty and absolutes. However, we must now look at why Spong thinks that the church has got it wrong and why liberal scholarship and morality is on the right track. To answer these questions, we must look at Spong’s world view.

So the original poster parrots his prodigy Bishop Spong as follows....



Now here is the link exposing the cult of Liberal Theology......

What’s Wrong With Bishop Spong?

Watch the YouTube video by Walter Martin who exposes the cult of liberal theology, that denies the objective power of Jesus Christ as the Almighty God.

What liberal theology does is to try and deny the Genesis account and to deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, is so much to deny his deity as the God of the Holy Bible.

Do not believe one word they say...because to deny the Word of God is to infuse subject morality within an autonomous law society that is inclusive of all worldly sins because man is deity according to their anti gospel, in that man can wing salvation themselves by their own subjective morality.

That is why you see Liberals accepting homosexual sins, accepting transgender sins, and even embracing the defiling of God's image through the transhumanist agenda.

Walter Martin in one particular video between himself and Bishop Spong asked Spong if Jesus said something, do you accept Jesus as the final authority on any given issue?

Bishop Spong said no!

The cult of liberal theology is what is being promoted by the original Poster.

I don't need to prove anything, for the proof is in the pudding, but please don't eat their pudding, because it has a stench from here to heaven. Don't buy it, and certainly don't promote Liberal Theology subjective morality garbage that states that words don't mean what they mean from an objective context, rather they have only applied meaning subjectively and so every one can have a completely different views about morality and about God and still be saved and that's how they can all sing Gomba Yah together.

What about the millions of Christians who are conservative and who still don't buy into YEC notions about the Bible--supposing they have even heard of them? Copts, for example,who have hardly had a new theological idea since Jesus lived in Egypt? Armenians? Chaldeans? Thomas Christians? Go ahead and rail against liberal Christians all you want--I quit the Episcopal Church for some of the same reasons. But don't go thinking that everyone who is not a YEC like you is some airy-fairy new age Protestant and that your idea about the Bible is the ancient and traditional view.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

Should Genesis be taken literally? Is the Bible the word of God? If it is, it can surely be trusted to mean what it says and say what it means, can't it? What does it say about origins? That everything was created in six days (not thousands, millions, billions of years, but days). To emphasise that, it deliberately mentions "the evening and the morning." Now if scientists (excluding of course, creation scientists) had not come up with notions like universes exploding out of nothing, life coming from non-living chemicals and then immediately being able to reproduce, one type of creature changing into something totally different, would anyone even question the account given in Genesis? I don't think so. Now look around, do we ever see something coming from nothing? No. Do we ever see life starting spontaneously from non-living chemicals? No. Do we see any creatures on this planet that are in the process of bridging the sort of massive gaps that are alleged to have occurred during so-called macro evolution? No. Do you consider the grass of the fields or the trees in countryside your [very] distant relatives? I hope not. Have you ever considered the case against evolution, because let's be clear on this, if evolution is false, then creation (by God) has to be true and wouldn't it make sense that such a creator would want to reveal something of how and when He created everything to those creatures (i.e., humans) that had been given the capacity to consider such things? Where could we go to find such a revelation. I would suggest that the only place would be the opening chapters of the Bible and that is where we find it. Fine, if anyone wants to scoff at that and put man's fallible ideas in its place, then go ahead. But I don't have that much faith in such fanciful notions and although creation scientists may be in the minority, truth isn't necessarily determined by the majority viewpoint. I believe that the Genesis account is the true account of our origin and that to believe otherwise causes enormous difficulties for the integrity of the Bible as a whole.

 

[The Times]

Well, I have to respect your guts in making the claiming that, unlike the rest of us mere mortals, you:

1. Have magical powers;
2. Need not concern yourselves with facts.

More later - I am sure there is a lot to say in response to your post.

Do not mock the gifts of the Spirit!
Many true regenerated Christians have these gifts.
It is the unbelieving world that mocks these gifts.

I would not expect another brother or sister in Christ to mock these gifts.

Christians live by faith and the truth is in us, because the Lord lives in us. It is not our truth but Christ's because we have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The cult of liberal theology denies the truth of Christ and promotes their narrative according to their subjective word view to make Christ's instructions allegories, so that even the authority of Jesus needs to comply with their world view otherwise it is tossed out as fundamentalist and not compatible with their autononous law society, thar embraces subjective morality.

Jesus said if you love me then you will follow my instructions to the jot and tittle.

I know Jesus lives in me and I am loved and I love him.

Do you love Jesus or do you love the world by complying with the world and its autonomous law society?

Be honest in your answers, because I know the truth lives in me, there is no requirement of me to show you evidence or facts of objective truths, as is the case for anyone asking me to prove to them if God exists.