• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

The Creation Story: Literal, or Figurative?

public hermit

social troglodyte
Site Supporter
Aug 20, 2019
12,670
13,509
East Coast
✟1,062,314.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Believing in a man who claimed to be God in the flesh, whose followers say He rose from the dead, healed the sick and casted demons out of people will also undoubtedly make us look like imbeciles to the world

Agreed. The gospel is sufficient for seeming foolish to the world. But should we tack on geocentrism in the face of reason and evidence to ensure the ridicule sticks? Is the crucified and resurrected Christ not sufficient for our appearing foolish, we have to add to it? And then to imply one's salvation is somehow contingent on these kinds of things? Unimpressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

tryphena rose

Daughter of the Most High
Jun 3, 2019
328
513
Idaho
✟61,975.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Agreed. The gospel is sufficient for seeming foolish to the world. But should we tack on geocentrism in the face of reason and evidence to ensure the ridicule sticks? Is the crucified and resurrected Christ not sufficient for our appearing foolish, we have to add to it? And then to imply one's salvation is somehow contingent on these kinds of things? Unimpressive.
No, I wouldn't argue that at all. In any discussion between believers, Jesus and salvation in Him should always be the main focus and should never be lost sight of. Someone shouldn't be told they're not really a Christian if they choose to eat meat or choose to eat herbs only right? I think this conversation would fall into the same kind of category. If someone believes the earth to be round and another believes the earth to be flat, whatever the reasoning be, but both have put their trust and faith in Jesus, then both are saved as far as anyone but God can truly tell and we are not to judge otherwise. This does not make or break one's salvation in Christ.

However, I will stand by there only being one truth when it comes to the shape of the earth and the Bible consistently supporting that one shape. I personally think, if you're going to look foolish to the world no matter what you say, however logical it may sound, then might as well do so by trusting fully in God's word and not by leaning more on one's own understanding or caving into one's fear of looking idiotic to a lost world.

I genuinely and sincerely believe the earth to not be the geocentric model solely because of what I read and find within the scriptures. I've looked at other things like NASA and so forth and find little reason to trust the "evidence" they present, however the Bible remains my foundation for believing what I truly believe. Everything else is less important. If that makes me a laughing stock and a fool to the world, then so be it. But I don't think I should be labeled a fool by my own brothers and sisters, as again, Jesus is the priority and the main thing that connects us all within the body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: public hermit
Upvote 0

public hermit

social troglodyte
Site Supporter
Aug 20, 2019
12,670
13,509
East Coast
✟1,062,314.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
No, I wouldn't argue that at all. In any discussion between believers, Jesus and salvation in Him should always be the main focus and should never be lost sight of. Someone shouldn't be told they're not really a Christian if they choose to eat meat or choose to eat herbs only right? I think this conversation would fall into the same kind of category. If someone believes the earth to be round and another believes the earth to be flat, whatever the reasoning be, but both have put their trust and faith in Jesus, then both are saved as far as anyone but God can truly tell and we are not to judge otherwise. This does not make or break one's salvation in Christ.

However, I will stand by there only being one truth when it comes to the shape of the earth and the Bible consistently supporting that one shape. I personally think, if you're going to look foolish to the world no matter what you say, however logical it may sound, then might as well do so by trusting fully in God's word and not by leaning more on one's own understanding or caving into one's fear of looking idiotic to a lost world.

I genuinely and sincerely believe the earth to not be the geocentric model solely because of what I read and find within the scriptures. I've looked at other things like NASA and so forth and find little reason to trust the "evidence" they present, however the Bible remains my foundation for believing what I truly believe. Everything else is less important. If that makes me a laughing stock and a fool to the world, then so be it. But I don't think I should be labeled a fool by my own brothers and sisters, as again, Jesus is the priority and the main thing that connects us all within the body.

I will throw in my lot with any fool for Christ. But that doesn't give them a blank check to my support regarding just any old nonsense. What to do? I guess we do what Christians have been doing since the Dead Sea was sick: we argue about it on CF.

I suppose my assertion (that some claims from Christians make us all look like embociles) might have come across as insensitive. I'm not big on feelings and sometimes miss the mark, neglecting the fact that others might be partial to their own. If I have caused harm, I admit my sin and promise to try and do better. Although, I don't take it back, because I believe it is true. Happily for all of us, I'm often very wrong, and perhaps this is just one more instance.

However, I do wonder about the motivations for a literalist's position. Because I don't take a literal reading to certain portions of scripture, I am accused of trying to cater to modernism and secular society. It's as if I'm an undercover spy for the opposition, sent in to infiltrate and wreak havoc on the truth. This, coming from my sisters and brothers in Christ. But, surprisingly I suppose, that's not my motivation, at all.

From the time I came to faith until now, I have been enamored with our Lord and blessed with an insatiable desire to know Him. As many others here, I have prayerfully tried to learn all I can, including subjects not directly related to the gospel, but related nonetheless. This is our Lord's creation, after all.

What I have been saying on thiis tread is where I am at, after prayerfully engaged study. My faith, love, and hope in our Lord is stronger and deeper than when I first began, by God's grace. My motivation is not to please some secular idea, but to please my Lord. Literalists might not believe that, but oh well.

I have a theory about the motivations of literalists. I won't say it's true, but I'll throw it out there for anyone to consider. I believe that like me, literalists want to please the living, risen Christ. But I also believe literalists are afraid. I get it. If my faith depended in part on the opening chapters of Genesis being literal, I might be willing to defend every jot and tittle, in spite of any seeming absurdities.

Here's the thing. Like the literalist, I believe the great truths about God, creation, humanity, sin, and promised redemption that are revealed in the opening chapters of Genesis (the details of those great truths I posted earlier in this thread), and I believe them without holding that those chapters present a one-for-one account of historical happenings. I know it's a great mystery to some how that is possible, and I've tried to explain it, but it's true nonethless.

What happens to the literalist who at some point becomes convinced that those chapters aren't literal? It happens all the time. Will they lose their faith? That too happens all the time. I submit that such loss of faith is the result of a misapplied emphasis on the literalism of the scriptures, instead of the reality of Jesus Christ, which happily transcends every jot and tittle. In other words, such loss of faith is not necessary.

Literalism gives two options: literalism or no faith. And when literalists begin to lose faith, they have no recourse, no hand hold, because their faith was rooted in the book in a way that should be reserved for the Person. No wonder they fear science and philosophy.

If tomorrow they proved that the creation is older than six thousand years, that evolution is true, and never has a snake spoken I will go forward with no fear because Jesus Christ lives. Such a position is not only possible, it's desirable, and literalists should at least try to understand how and why.

Please forgive my indulgence in such a long post.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,503
10,870
New Jersey
✟1,356,460.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
And I've had a bunch of internet Christians who have said one doesn't have to believe in a literal resurrection. That's where this line of thinking leads us. The NT writers are often pointing back to the OT saints to show us how God worked out the plan of salvation. That's Paul in Romans: "God is faithful and we know that because he came through for his chosen people, therefore we know he will come through for us."
If the "legends" of what he did for his chosen people are just tales, why would we believe he will be faithful to us?
I don’t work back from what I want to believe and reject evidence as needed to make it come out that way. If the evidence suggests Jesus wasn’t resurrected, so be it. That’s not the conclusion I come to. I think the resurrection happened. But you have to look at evidence on the OT, not argue that treating part o& it i historical leads to conclusions you don’t like.
 
Upvote 0

tryphena rose

Daughter of the Most High
Jun 3, 2019
328
513
Idaho
✟61,975.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I will throw in my lot with any fool for Christ. But that doesn't give them a blank check to my support regarding just any old nonsense. What to do? I guess we do what Christians have been doing since the Dead Sea was sick: we argue about it on CF.

I suppose my assertion (that some claims from Christians make us all look like embociles) might have come across as insensitive. I'm not big on feelings and sometimes miss the mark, neglecting the fact that others might be partial to their own. If I have caused harm, I admit my sin and promise to try and do better. Although, I don't take it back, because I believe it is true. Happily for all of us, I'm often very wrong, and perhaps this is just one more instance.

However, I do wonder about the motivations for a literalist's position. Because I don't take a literal reading to certain portions of scripture, I am accused of trying to cater to modernism and secular society. It's as if I'm an undercover spy for the opposition, sent in to infiltrate and wreak havoc on the truth. This, coming from my sisters and brothers in Christ. But, surprisingly I suppose, that's not my motivation, at all.

From the time I came to faith until now, I have been enamored with our Lord and blessed with an insatiable desire to know Him. As many others here, I have prayerfully tried to learn all I can, including subjects not directly related to the gospel, but related nonetheless. This is our Lord's creation, after all.

What I have been saying on thiis tread is where I am at, after prayerfully engaged study. My faith, love, and hope in our Lord is stronger and deeper than when I first began, by God's grace. My motivation is not to please some secular idea, but to please my Lord. Literalists might not believe that, but oh well.

I have a theory about the motivations of literalists. I won't say it's true, but I'll throw it out there for anyone to consider. I believe that like me, literalists want to please the living, risen Christ. But I also believe literalists are afraid. I get it. If my faith depended in part on the opening chapters of Genesis being literal, I might be willing to defend every jot and tittle, in spite of any seeming absurdities.

Here's the thing. Like the literalist, I believe the great truths about God, creation, humanity, sin, and promised redemption that are revealed in the opening chapters of Genesis (the details of those great truths I posted earlier in this thread), and I believe them without holding that those chapters present a one-for-one account of historical happenings. I know it's a great mystery to some how that is possible, and I've tried to explain it, but it's true nonethless.

What happens to the literalist who at some point becomes convinced that those chapters aren't literal? It happens all the time. Will they lose their faith? That too happens all the time. I submit that such loss of faith is the result of a misapplied emphasis on the literalism of the scriptures, instead of the reality of Jesus Christ, which happily transcends every jot and tittle. In other words, such loss of faith is not necessary.

Literalism gives two options: literalism or no faith. And when literalists begin to lose faith, they have no recourse, no hand hold, because their faith was rooted in the book in a way that should be reserved for the Person. No wonder they fear science and philosophy.

If tomorrow they proved that the creation is older than six thousand years, that evolution is true, and never has a snake spoken I will go forward with no fear because Jesus Christ lives. Such a position is not only possible, it's desirable, and literalists should at least try to understand how and why.

Please forgive my indulgence in such a long post.
You've shown a lot of humility here sister, and that's always very admirable. God bless you for such great humility.

I do try my best to acknowledge the fact that every believer is going to be at a different place in their walk with the Lord. Many will come to different conclusions, whether through study and prayer, as you've pointed out. Many will have different convictions. Believers will also be influenced by various different things, whether that be a denomination, a particular take on apologetics, Bible translation, archeological sources, you name it. But we must all admit none of us know everything and cannot pretend to have it all figured out. I know by what God has revealed to me, that what Jesus seeks after is the heart. That's why I tried in several posts here to emphasis that God cares not for our intellect or knowledge, but for where our heart is at with Him. And to me, you sound very sincere in seeking after the Lord, just as I know that I try my best to search after Him with my whole heart as well. And in this, I think we can both rejoice together.

I think what you've stated about a literalist, could certainly be true for some. Some people may very well abandon science and philosophy and cling to the literalist view out of fear of losing faith in the Lord. Just as I think someone who takes the figurative route can find themselves coming to some other philosophy or religion all together, turning from the faith, though for many this is not always the case. The world is full of so many ideas, many conflicting, most not in favor of Christ, that I can most definitely see the possibility in that. Surely I've come across cases on both sides. But if I may share, my experience and walk has been entirely an different one as someone with a literal view of the scriptures.

I know I've mentioned it a few times throughout my time on Christian Forums and I really don't want to sound like a broken record, but I am a former atheist. And with that, very supernaturally, has God not only healed me of a broken heart, but shattered my world-view in what seemed like the exact second I accepted Jesus as my Lord and savior. My world-view was formerly a hedonistic, materialistic, relative one. I denied all things supernatural and embraced this world and the universe being it. All of it having very little real meaning besides what I make of it. Now, I have not jumped the gun and just shout from the roof tops that science has no place or purpose or that it isn't useful or that everything scientific is a flat out lie. But instead of seeing science as my god (in a sense) and the only tool useful to answering the purpose and meaning to my life, I see it now as nothing more then a mere tool. It certainly can be a very useful one, but nothing that replaces the truths found within the Bible for me. For me, the Bible is greater than all of man's science or philosophy. I turn to God's word for answers before I turn to science because that's what I've come to trust the absolute most in this whole world. Because where man has failed me, God never has and so I've come to apply that to just about everything in my walk with Him.

For me, there is no insecurity of losing my faith. There's not an ounce of fear or doubt. I'm very sure of it and pray that when I stand before the Lord someday, I will hear those words "good and faithful servant", just as I'm sure every Christian does. And just as you've stated so beautifully, if the world came out tomorrow claiming all of this physical evidence that the Bible is actually just entirely wrong, I would still hold fast to my faith in Jesus because I'm so sure of who He is and how He died for us all.

I apologize if anything I personally have stated here, made you feel like you aren't an advocate for the truth in Christ or that you have no faith. That is never my intention to make anyone feel that way. We all need to show grace and mercy because our Lord has shown us so much when we didn't deserve it. And I just pray the Lord makes us more like Jesus everyday. :relaxed:
 
Upvote 0

renniks

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2008
10,682
3,449
✟156,970.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don’t work back from what I want to believe and reject evidence as needed to make it come out that way. If the evidence suggests Jesus wasn’t resurrected, so be it. That’s not the conclusion I come to. I think the resurrection happened. But you have to argue that there is good evidence for it, not that rejecting it leads to conclusions you don’t like
It's not about what I like. It's about what God's word says.
 
Upvote 0

public hermit

social troglodyte
Site Supporter
Aug 20, 2019
12,670
13,509
East Coast
✟1,062,314.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I know I've mentioned it a few times throughout my time on Christian Forums and I really don't want to sound like a broken record, but I am a former atheist. And with that, very supernaturally, has God not only healed me of a broken heart, but shattered my world-view in what seemed like the exact second I accepted Jesus as my Lord and savior. My world-view was formerly a hedonistic, materialistic, relative one. I denied all things supernatural and embraced this world and the universe being it. All of it having very little real meaning besides what I make of it. Now, I have not jumped the gun and just shout from the roof tops that science has no place or purpose or that it isn't useful or that everything scientific is a flat out lie. But instead of seeing science as my god (in a sense) and the only tool useful to answering the purpose and meaning to my life, I see it now as nothing more then a mere tool. It certainly can be a very useful one, but nothing that replaces the truths found within the Bible for me. For me, the Bible is greater than all of man's science or philosophy. I turn to God's word for answers before I turn to science because that's what I've come to trust the absolute most in this whole world. Because where man has failed me, God never has and so I've come to apply that to just about everything in my walk with Him.

That's absolutely beautiful. Thank you for taking the time to share it. I love that.

For me, there is no insecurity of losing my faith. There's not an ounce of fear or doubt. I'm very sure of it and pray that when I stand before the Lord someday, I will hear those words "good and faithful servant", just as I'm sure every Christian does. And just as you've stated so beautifully, if the world came out tomorrow claiming all of this physical evidence that the Bible is actually just entirely wrong, I would still hold fast to my faith in Jesus because I'm so sure of who He is and how He died for us all

God be praised! :)

apologize if anything I personally have stated here, made you feel like you aren't an advocate for the truth in Christ or that you have no faith. That is never my intention to make anyone feel that way. We all need to show grace and mercy because our Lord has shown us so much when we didn't deserve it. And I just pray the Lord makes us more like Jesus everyday

You are very kind and gracious. I see the family resemblance of the Father in you.

shown a lot of humility here sister, and that's always very admirable. God bless you for such great humility

I have enjoyed and appreciated all you've said. And I'm especially fascinated that you perceived my feminine side! ^_^ :p
Not many notice.
 
Upvote 0

Jay Sea

................ Ke ĉiuj vivu
Mar 28, 2020
340
161
82
victoria
✟33,847.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The Bible is real history or it isn't. If Adam wasn't a real person why would you believe Jesus was?
Many deep truths are and were told in stories, parables, legends etc. Stories make you dig deeper and not just accept the superficial. That tis why Yeshua used stories. Life is not a law court where lawyers bandy facts back and forward.
In LOve
Jay Sea
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

renniks

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2008
10,682
3,449
✟156,970.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Many deep truths are and were told in stories, parables, legends etc. Stories make you dig deeper and not just accept the superficial. That tis why Yeshua used stories. Life is not a law court where lawyers bandy facts back and forward
Again, you are ignoring the fact that Genesis is written like a history book. While there are many parables and visions in scripture, they are identified as such.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,867
2,673
Livingston County, MI, US
✟225,741.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Several scriptures that challenge the figurative reading of Genesis.

Mark 10:6 NIV
“But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’
Jesus is saying that God made two humans. He is not saying that only literal language can reveal truth.

Below is another passage that is figurative language that reveals truth.

Psalm 104
Easy-to-Read Version
104 My soul, praise the Lord!
Lord my God, you are very great!
You are clothed with glory and honor.
2 You wear light like a robe.
You spread out the skies like a curtain.
3 You built your home above them.[a]
You use the thick clouds like a chariot
and ride across the sky on the wings of the wind.
4 You make the winds your messengers
and flames of fire your servants.
5 You built the earth on its foundations,
so it can never be moved.
6 You covered it with water like a blanket.

The water covered even the mountains. Noah
Luke 11:50-51 NIV
Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all.

Luke 17:26-27 NIV

does not relate to the creation account
Acts 17:24-27 NIV
“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.

He did not make all the nations in Genesis 1

Romans 1:18-20 NIV
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
Again the text is not saying Genesis 1 has to be literal language.

Romans 5:12 NIV
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

Again the text is not saying Genesis 1 has to be literal language.

Romans 8:19-22 NIV
For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.
22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.
This relates to the Fall. It does not say the text is not saying Genesis 1 has to be literal language.

1 Corinthians 15:21-22 NIV
For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

This relates to the Fall. It does not say the text is not saying Genesis 1 has to be literal language.

2 Peter 3:5-6 NIV
But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.

It does not say the text is not saying Genesis 1 has to be literal language.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,867
2,673
Livingston County, MI, US
✟225,741.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
As long as you accept dualism, this position is pretty much unfalsifiable. As you mention, you can accept the usual evolutionary model, but say that God added a soul starting with one pair. Since there’s no way to observe a soul or show how it originated, it’s hard to disprove this.

But even unfalsifiable ideas die when what gave rise to them is no longer believed. The concept of original sin as it developed in the Church isn’t obviously present in Genesis. It’s an inference, but one that almost certainly wouldn’t have developed among people who didn’t consider the account historical. In that respect it’s different from other things we get from the story, such as being made in Gods image, an idea that is quite explicit, and works even if we don’t think creation happened in six days.

I predict that Catholics will reinterpret the tradition over the course of the next few decades.


Definition of polygenism
: the doctrine or belief that existing human races have evolved from two or more distinct ancestral types

Definition of monogenism


: the doctrine or belief that all human races have descended from a single created pair or from a common ancestral type

Definition of MONOGENISM
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,867
2,673
Livingston County, MI, US
✟225,741.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Mythology is a prefilozophic, prerational view of the world.

Its a try to generalize various human and natural phenomena.

This generalization was done not in abstract, theoretical level as we are used today. But with the use of imagination, personification and symbols.

The basic theme of myths is a confict between order and chaos, which is also what Gen 1 and 2 are presenting.

I suspect you use the word "fabrication" meaning something like "lie" or something negative. "Bible cannot have such fabrications". In a degradatory meaning. Thats not the right understanding of ancient myths.

my·thol·o·gy
/məˈTHäləjē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a collection of myths, especially one belonging to a particular religious or cultural tradition.
"a book discussing Jewish and Christian mythologies"
2.
the study of myths.
"this field includes archaeology, comparative mythology, and folklore"

Definition of mythological
1: of or relating to mythology or myths : dealt with in mythology
2: lacking factual basis or historical validity : MYTHICAL, FABULOUS
Definition of MYTHOLOGICAL

Definition of figurative


1a: representing by a figure or resemblance : EMBLEMATICthe figurative dove of peace
b: of or relating to representation of form or figure in artfigurative sculpture
2a: expressing one thing in terms normally denoting another with which it may be regarded as analogous : METAPHORICALfigurative languagein a figurative sense, civilization marches up and down— Lewis Mumford
b: characterized by figures of speech a figurative description

Definition of FIGURATIVE

The name of this thread is The Creation Story: Literal, or Figurative?

The question asked to start this thread is only asking what kind of language is used.

My view is Moses used figurative language.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,867
2,673
Livingston County, MI, US
✟225,741.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
When one compares Genesis 1-3 with below, we see that one is not the source with the other.

Enuma Elish (The Babylonian Epic of Creation)

Tablet I

1 When the heavens above did not exist,
2 And earth beneath had not come into being —
3 There was Apsû, the first in order, their begetter,
4 And demiurge Tia-mat, who gave birth to them all;
5 They had mingled their waters together
6 Before meadow-land had coalesced and reed-bed was to he found —
7 When not one of the gods had been formed
8 Or had come into being, when no destinies had been decreed,
9 The gods were created within them:
10 Lah(mu and Lah(amu were formed and came into being.
11 While they grew and increased in stature
12 Anšar and Kišar, who excelled them, were created.
13 They prolonged their days, they multiplied their years.
14 Anu, their son, could rival his fathers.
15 Anu, the son, equalled Anšar,
16 And Anu begat Nudimmud, his own equal.
17 Nudimmud was the champion among his fathers:
18 Profoundly discerning, wise, of robust strength;
19 Very much stronger than his father's begetter, Anšar
20 He had no rival among the gods, his brothers.
21 The divine brothers came together,
22 Their clamour got loud, throwing Tia-mat into a turmoil.
23 They jarred the nerves of Tia-mat,
24 And by their dancing they spread alarm in Anduruna.
25 Apsû did not diminish their clamour,
26 And Tia-mat was silent when confronted with them.
27 Their conduct was displeasing to her,
28 Yet though their behaviour was not good, she wished to spare them.
29 Thereupon Apsû, the begetter of the great gods,
30 Called Mummu, his vizier, and addressed him,
31 "Vizier Mummu, who gratifies my pleasure,
32 Come, let us go to Tia-mat!"
33 They went and sat, facing Tia-mat,
34 As they conferred about the gods, their sons.
35 Apsû opened his mouth
36 And addressed Tia-mat
37 "Their behaviour has become displeasing to me
38 And I cannot rest in the day-time or sleep at night.
39 I will destroy and break up their way of life
40 That silence may reign and we may sleep."
41 When Tia-mat heard this
42 She raged and cried out to her spouse,
43 She cried in distress, fuming within herself,
44 She grieved over the (plotted) evil,
45 "How can we destroy what we have given birth to?
46 Though their behaviour causes distress, let us tighten discipline graciously."
47 Mummu spoke up with counsel for Apsû—
48 (As from) a rebellious vizier was the counsel of his Mummu—
49 "Destroy, my father, that lawless way of life,
50 That you may rest in the day-time and sleep by night!"
51 Apsû was pleased with him, his face beamed
52 Because he had plotted evil against the gods, his sons.
53 Mummu put his arms around Apsû's neck,
54 He sat on his knees kissing him.
55 What they plotted in their gathering
56 Was reported to the gods, their sons.
57 The gods heard it and were frantic.
58 They were overcome with silence and sat quietly.
59 Ea, who excels in knowledge, the skilled and learned,
60 Ea, who knows everything, perceived their tricks.
61 He fashioned it and made it to be all-embracing,
62 He executed it skilfully as supreme—his pure incantation.
63 He recited it and set it on the waters,
64 He poured sleep upon him as he was slumbering deeply.
65 He put Apsû to slumber as he poured out sleep,
66 And Mummu, the counsellor, was breathless with agitation.
67 He split (Apsû's) sinews, ripped off his crown,
68 Carried away his aura and put it on himself.
69 He bound Apsû and killed him;
70 Mummu he confined and handled roughly.
71 He set his dwelling upon Apsû,
72 And laid hold on Mummu, keeping the nose-rope in his hand.
73 After Ea had bound and slain his enemies,
74 Had achieved victory over his foes,
75 He rested quietly in his chamber,
76 He called it Apsû, whose shrines he appointed.
77 Then he founded his living-quarters within it,
78 And Ea and Damkina, his wife, sat in splendour.
79 In the chamber of the destinies, the room of the archetypes,
80 The wisest of the wise, the sage of the gods, Be-l was conceived.
81 In Apsû was Marduk born,
82 In pure Apsû was Marduk born.
83 Ea his father begat him,
84 Damkina his mother bore him.
85 He sucked the breasts of goddesses,
86 A nurse reared him and filled him with terror.
87 His figure was well developed, the glance of his eyes was dazzling,
88 His growth was manly, he was mighty from the beginning.
89 Anu, his father's begetter, saw him,
90 He exulted and smiled; his heart filled with joy.
91 Anu rendered him perfect: his divinity was remarkable,
92 And he became very lofty, excelling them in his attributes.
93 His members were incomprehensibly wonderful,
94 Incapable of being grasped with the mind, hard even to look on.
95 Four were his eyes, four his ears,
96 Flame shot forth as he moved his lips.
97 His four ears grew large,
93 And his eyes likewise took in everything.
99 His figure was lofty and superior in comparison with the gods,
100 His limbs were surpassing, his nature was superior.
101 'Mari-utu, Mari-utu,
102 The Son, the Sun-god, the Sun-god of the gods.'
103 He was clothed with the aura of the Ten Gods, so exalted was his strength,
104 The Fifty Dreads were loaded upon him.
105 Anu formed and gave birth to the four winds,
106 He delivered them to him, "My son, let them whirl!"
107 He formed dust and set a hurricane to drive it,
108 He made a wave to bring consternation on Tia-mat.
109 Tia-mat was confounded; day and night she was frantic.
110 The gods took no rest, they . . . . . . .
111 In their minds they plotted evil,
112 And addressed their mother Tia-mat,
113 "When Apsû, your spouse, was killed,
114 You did not go at his side, but sat quietly.
115 The four dreadful winds have been fashioned
116 To throw you into confusion, and we cannot sleep.
117 You gave no thought to Apsû, your spouse,
113 Nor to Mummu, who is a prisoner. Now you sit alone.
119 Henceforth you will be in frantic consternation!
120 And as for us, who cannot rest, you do not love us!
121 Consider our burden, our eyes are hollow.
122 Break the immovable yoke that we may sleep.
123 Make battle, avenge them!
124 [ . . ] . . . . reduce to nothingness!
125 Tia-mat heard, the speech pleased her,
126 (She said,) "Let us make demons, [as you] have advised."
127 The gods assembled within her.
128 They conceived [evil] against the gods their begetters.
129 They . . . . . and took the side of Tia-mat,
130 Fiercely plotting, unresting by night and day,
131 Lusting for battle, raging, storming,
132 They set up a host to bring about conflict.
133 Mother H(ubur, who forms everything,
134 Supplied irresistible weapons, and gave birth to giant serpents.
135 They had sharp teeth, they were merciless . . . .
136 With poison instead of blood she filled their bodies.
137 She clothed the fearful monsters with dread,
138 She loaded them with an aura and made them godlike.
139 (She said,) "Let their onlooker feebly perish,
140 May they constantly leap forward and never retire."
141 She created the Hydra, the Dragon, the Hairy Hero
142 The Great Demon, the Savage Dog, and the Scorpion-man,
143 Fierce demons, the Fish-man, and the Bull-man,
144 Carriers of merciless weapons, fearless in the face of battle.
145 Her commands were tremendous, not to be resisted.
146 Altogether she made eleven of that kind.
147 Among the gods, her sons, whom she constituted her host,
148 She exalted Qingu, and magnified him among them.
149 The leadership of the army, the direction of the host,
150 The bearing of weapons, campaigning, the mobilization of conflict,
151 The chief executive power of battle, supreme command,
152 She entrusted to him and set him on a throne,
153 "I have cast the spell for you and exalted you in the host of the gods,
154 I have delivered to you the rule of all the gods.
155 You are indeed exalted, my spouse, you are renowned,
156 Let your commands prevail over all the Anunnaki."
157 She gave him the Tablet of Destinies and fastened it to his breast,
158 (Saying) "Your order may not be changed; let the utterance of your mouth be firm."
159 After Qingu was elevated and had acquired the power of Anuship,
160 He decreed the destinies for the gods, her sons:
161 "May the utterance of your mouths subdue the fire-god,
162 May your poison by its accumulation put down aggression."

Tablet II
Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text
 
Upvote 0

Jay Sea

................ Ke ĉiuj vivu
Mar 28, 2020
340
161
82
victoria
✟33,847.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Again, you are ignoring the fact that Genesis is written like a history book. While there are many parables and visions in scripture, they are identified as such.
What countries history is not penned only from their point of view at the time of writing. There is more than one creation story.
In LOve
Jay Sea
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,867
2,673
Livingston County, MI, US
✟225,741.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It can't in a book that is written as history. You have to rip the creation account from the rest of the book, and claim it's poetry and mythology while the rest is written as factual? Does not compute.

The Bible does have literal and figurative language.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

renniks

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2008
10,682
3,449
✟156,970.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What countries history is not penned only from their point of view at the time of writing. There is more than one creation story.
In LOve
Jay Sea
It's not any history book. It's God's story. And the only reason people take it as figurative is because of the current theories about origins.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,820
74
Las Vegas
✟263,478.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Now this just cracked me up!! For following this is this:
Again the text is not saying Genesis 1 has to be literal language.

Seriously!! It says sins came through one man and thus sin and death came to all men---I can not think of anything more literal! One man, through that one man a whole world has sin and death, byt that isn't literal??? Sorry, but the two statements are totally opposed to each other. Then what is the real stgory of how sin and death came to this world?

And then, of course, comes the assertion that the world is flat because the bible says so---nothing at all literal about that?? Problem is, the bible says no such thing. Some people have taken a few passages to
try and make it say that. I've read all the passages they used to prove it. Strange that the very ones that insist that Genesis is not literal take obviously poetic passages and insist they are real!! Whilst one look at the moon and other planets that require no magnification, are all round. But---so what, the earth can't possibly be round also!

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Psa 33:7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses.
Psa 33:8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him.
Psa 33:9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Nothing there indicating that God commanded and eventually it stood fast.

Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Does anything there indicate that God said let there be light and many years later, there was light?

Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

So this actually should read " And in the 7th eon God ended His work which He had made and rested from all His work which He had made. And blessed the 7th eon and sanctified it because in it He had rested from his work which God created and made.

Yah---that makes perfect sense!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,820
74
Las Vegas
✟263,478.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
The Bible does have literal and figurative language.


The bible has literal, it has poetic, and it has prophetic and allegorical (parable) language. CONTEXT determines which it is.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,002
2,819
Australia
✟174,175.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think you are making some assumptions about the spiritual realm that may be false. Just because we are prevented from seeing it doesn't make it invisible in reality.

We we created in the image of God, that part is stated in the text. Exactly what that image is, if it is physical or spiritual is not stated. But fact remains that God is not a man.
 
Upvote 0