Taking Genesis Creation Literally

YHWH's Lion said:

Recently I have been thinking about how some christians pick and choose what parts of the bible they will decide to take literally and what parts they will not.
Are only parts of the Bible inspired?

Click to expand...

I think the hermeneutic that inspiration only occurs in the literal sense of the text is actually a limitation on the word of God that destroys much of its rich meaning. So I think we can both agree that a 100% literal reading of the text would be foolish, since there are sections that self-identify as non-literal. So then one must decide the criteria for how to determine when a text should be taken literally and when a text should be seen in other senses. Is this picking and choosing parts of the Bible while throwing out others? Not at all. It is trying to use our God-given abilities to think and our faithful reflections on the text to determine the meaning that God intended for the words, all the words.

YHWH's Lion said:

Recently I have been thinking about how some christians pick and choose what parts of the bible they will decide to take literally and what parts they will not.
Are only parts of the Bible inspired?

When the creation account in Genesis describes the Moon being a light source of its own and not "reflecting light" as the world teaches.

Would it be so hard for God to inspire the writer to write " the lesser light reflects the greater light"

Again Genesis describing Waters outside of the Firmament (the firmament in which all of the stars, moon and sun are placed)

In genesis people living to be almost 1000 years old.

Book of Joshua describing the Sun and the Moon standing still. (not the earth, if earth that we are told is rotating 1000 miles per hour was to suddenly stop, what would happen to the earth?)

would it be so hard for God to inspire the writer to say the earth stood still ?

The creation of the life on earth being about 6000 years ago.

if we as christians believe that Satan is real and has deceived the whole world and is in control of this planet why would it be so hard to believe that he is not controlling all of the important information that is put out to the masses? especially information that would cause people to doubt the Bible?
By what authority do christians have the right to choose not to believe some parts and believe others? If someone says, I do not believe in a literal creation account nor Adam and eve, or perhaps some of the other above topics I mentioned. But then say I believe that Jesus is the Son of God and he did many miracles and was raised from the dead. By what reason? Because with that logic a Christian can chose to just believe what ever he or she wants from the bible and no other christian can say anything about it.

thoughts?

Click to expand...

One answer is, just like when you read an email from a friend, you automatically apply a literal or figurative meaning based on context and the knowledge of your friend. It's not difficult. We do it every day.

The other answer is that liberals have been doing what you rightfully find inconsistent, for years. Some even go beyond ignoring the plain text of scripture to adding a sprinkling of a few other religions in for good measure, as well.

Mankind does not want God as it interferes with his delusions of being God. This is one reason that I'm convinced of original sin and total depravity.

YHWH's Lion said:

can you clarify your example because I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Click to expand...

That was meant to answer your question regarding how we know if speech (or writing) is literal or figurative.

YHWH's Lion said:

Recently I have been thinking about how some christians pick and choose what parts of the bible they will decide to take literally and what parts they will not.
Are only parts of the Bible inspired?

When the creation account in Genesis describes the Moon being a light source of its own and not "reflecting light" as the world teaches.

Would it be so hard for God to inspire the writer to write " the lesser light reflects the greater light"

Again Genesis describing Waters outside of the Firmament (the firmament in which all of the stars, moon and sun are placed)

In genesis people living to be almost 1000 years old.

Book of Joshua describing the Sun and the Moon standing still. (not the earth, if earth that we are told is rotating 1000 miles per hour was to suddenly stop, what would happen to the earth?)

would it be so hard for God to inspire the writer to say the earth stood still ?

The creation of the life on earth being about 6000 years ago.

if we as christians believe that Satan is real and has deceived the whole world and is in control of this planet why would it be so hard to believe that he is not controlling all of the important information that is put out to the masses? especially information that would cause people to doubt the Bible?
By what authority do christians have the right to choose not to believe some parts and believe others? If someone says, I do not believe in a literal creation account nor Adam and eve, or perhaps some of the other above topics I mentioned. But then say I believe that Jesus is the Son of God and he did many miracles and was raised from the dead. By what reason? Because with that logic a Christian can chose to just believe what ever he or she wants from the bible and no other christian can say anything about it.

thoughts?

Click to expand...

Perhaps what is a problem here for most people these days is that they don't understand that ALL writing, to some degree or other, is representational and not, nor can it be, a perfect reflection of the reality that the writer is attempting to describe.

So, the issue isn't one of picking and choosing literal verses over non-literal ones, but rather it is one of realizing that every statement in a written work, even within the Bible, has a multifaceted set of contexts in which it sits. Furthermore, after investigation, some statements will be found to be figures of speech, while others will evince more straight-forward prose, and in the ancient Jewish writing of the Bible, much more figurative language can be found than would be in works written of the modern age.

Hence, most Christians living in the free world today should be responsible and learn something about hermeneutics (and exegesis), so they can understand better the nature of the written word, even that of the Bible.

Peace
2PhiloVoid

2PhiloVoid said:

Perhaps what is a problem here for most people these days is that they don't understand that ALL writing, to some degree or other, is representational and not, nor can it be, a perfect reflection of the reality that the writer is attempting to describe.

So, the issue isn't one of picking and choosing literal verses over non-literal ones, but rather it is one of realizing that every statement in a written work, even within the Bible, has a multifaceted set of contexts in which it sits. Furthermore, after investigation, some statements will be found to be figures of speech, while others will evince more straight-forward prose, and in the ancient Jewish writing of the Bible, much more figurative language can be found than would be in works written of the modern age.

Hence, most Christians living in the free world today should be responsible and learn something about hermeneutics (and exegesis), so they can understand better the nature of the written word, even that of the Bible.

Peace
2PhiloVoid

Click to expand...

Hmmm... that's interesting, I don't recall the Bible stating it quite that way... don't think it needs to be that complicated... it's based on faith, not earthly wisdom.

Proverbs 3:5-6
Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

John 16:13
But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.

Psalm 19:7
The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

1 Corinthians 3:19
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

YHWH's Lion said:

which text are you talking about that you want me to agree 100% and which sections self identify as non literal?

Click to expand...

Well, starting with things Jesus said, the parables and most of the "I am" statements are figurative. Jumping to Paul, there are several times where he prefaces a section with, "This is just my opinion".

This conflict between Biblical interpretation and scientific knowledge has been around for a long time. St. Augustine in his work "The Literal Meaning of Genesis" wrote the following:

http://college.holycross.edu/faculty/alaffey/other_files/Augustine-Genesis1.pdf
CHAPTER 19
On interpreting the mind of the sacred writer. Christians should not talk nonsense to unbelievers. Let us suppose that in explaining the words, “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and light was made,” one man thinks that it was material light that was made, and another that it was spiritual. As to the actual existence of “spiritual light" in a spiritual creature, our faith leaves no doubt; as to the existence of material light, celestial or supercelestial, even existing before the heavens, a light which could have been followed by night, there will be nothing in such a supposition contrary to the faith until unerring truth gives the lie to it. And if that should happen, this teaching was never in Holy Scripture but was an opinion proposed by man in his ignorance. On the other hand, if reason should prove that this opinion is unquestionably true, it will still be uncertain whether this sense was intended by the sacred writer when he used the words quoted above, or whether he meant something else no less true. And if the general drift of the passage shows that the sacred writer did not intend this teaching, the other, which he did intend, will not thereby be false; indeed, it will be true and more worth knowing. On the other hand, if the tenor of the words of Scripture does not militate against our taking this teaching as the mind of the writer, we shall still have to enquire whether he could not have meant something else besides. And if we find that he could have meant something else also, it will not be clear which of the two meanings he intended. And there is no difficulty if he is thought to have wished both interpretations if both are supported by clear indications in the context.
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although “they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.”

YHWH's Lion said in post 1:

Recently I have been thinking about how some christians pick and choose what parts of the bible they will decide to take literally and what parts they will not.

Click to expand...

Note that the Genesis Creation account can be taken literally without contradicting an old earth or evolution. For evolution per se (random mutation and survival of the fittest) can coexist with miraculous creation, just as an automated process created by a human (e.g. a computer program which makes random, colorful pictures which can be seen as art) can coexist with that human sometimes performing a task himself directly (painting some pictures by hand). I.e., evolution per se can simply be a process created by God to allow new, adaptive species to arise naturally over time, and this process can coexist with God sometimes creating species miraculously.

Some people ask why would God wait millions of years for something to evolve from a one-celled organism, when he could just instantly create it? He could do that for the same reason that he has a human start out as a one-celled organism: a zygote in its mother's womb. He then has it only gradually develop through natural means into an embryo, and then into a fetus, and then a baby, a toddler, an adolescent, and an adult. And he has other animals develop gradually in a similar way. And he has plants start out as seeds. So it must give God pleasure to see organisms develop naturally over time, just as it must give him pleasure to also sometimes create plants and animals miraculously, instantaneously, already fully-formed, like he did in Genesis 1:11-13 and Genesis 1:20-27, during 3 of the 7 literal, 24-hour days of Genesis 1:3 to 2:4.

-

Note that creationism can include what could be called a double-gap theory, meaning that there could have been 2 gaps of time in Genesis chapters 1-2, the 1st gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, and the 2nd gap between Genesis 2:4 and Genesis 2:5. Genesis 1:1 could have occurred some 4.5 billion years ago, when God first created the planet earth and its atmosphere (the 1st heaven, in which the birds fly: Genesis 1:20b). Between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, some 4.5 billion years could have occurred, in which God could have allowed his own created process of evolution to serve as a mechanism by which new species arose naturally on the earth. During those same 4.5 billion years, God could have also gone outside of evolution and created new species miraculously, whenever he wanted to (cf. punctuated equilibria).

Genesis 1:2 could refer to the condition of the earth only about 12,000 years ago (at the end of the Paleolithic period), after some cataclysm, such as a comet strike, had killed off all life on the planet (both evolved and miraculously created), and had submerged all land areas in water (comets contain huge amounts of water), and had ruined the atmosphere. The impact of the comet could have also knocked the earth out of its orbit around its original star, so that the earth was sent hurtling into the darkness of interstellar space as a "rogue planet" (astronomers estimate that rogue planets in our galaxy could outnumber the stars in our galaxy). Genesis 1:3 to 2:4 could then refer to God, over a period of 6 literal, 24-hour days (some 12,000 years ago, at the start of the Neolithic period), miraculously restoring to the earth light, a good atmosphere, dry land, and life, including a race of male and female homo sapiens sapiens, after God had miraculously restored land plants (Genesis 1:11-13) and land animals (Genesis 1:24-25) to the earth.

Then, only about 6,000 years ago, God miraculously created on the earth an individual male homo sapiens sapiens named Adam in an uninhabited desert land (Genesis 2:5-7; there, the original Hebrew word translated as "earth" can simply refer to a certain "land": e.g. Genesis 2:11). After that, God planted the plants of the local, Garden of Eden in that desert land (Genesis 2:8-9), and God placed Adam in that garden (Genesis 2:15). Then God miraculously created the animals of the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:19). Then he created an individual female homo sapiens sapiens (Genesis 2:22) whom Adam named Eve (Genesis 3:20).

Because Adam was created only about 6,000 years ago (based on Biblical chronology), yet there are homo sapiens sapiens fossils said to be as old as about 200,000 years, God could have first created homo sapiens sapiens (or it could have evolved by God's created process of evolution) as far back as about 200,000 years. Also, all the different hominid forms the fossils of which long predate or are as old as the earliest fossils of homo sapiens sapiens, and which preceding or coexisting hominid forms we don't consider to have been fully human like us (such as homo sapiens neanderthalensis), could have all been created by God (or could have evolved by God's created process of evolution) over millions of years prior to the first appearance of homo sapiens sapiens on the earth.

And this doesn't even get into the possibly trillion other inhabited planets in the universe on which homo sapiens sapiens (or similar or far more advanced life-forms) could have been created by God (or could have evolved by God's created process of evolution) billions of years prior to the first appearance of homo sapiens sapiens on the earth. For the universe could be about 14 billion years old, and it contains something like 100 billion galaxies, each containing something like 100 billion stars. So even if only one star out of every 10 billion stars has an inhabited planet, there would still be a trillion inhabited planets. And on most of these, God could have begun his miraculous work (and the work of his created process of evolution) billions of years prior to his beginning of his miraculous work (and the work of his created process of evolution) on the earth.

YHWH's Lion said in post 1:

Are only parts of the Bible inspired?

Click to expand...

No, all of it is inspired. For:

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness ...

Matthew 4:4 ... Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

YHWH's Lion said in post 1:

When the creation account in Genesis describes the Moon being a light source of its own and not "reflecting light" as the world teaches.

Click to expand...

Note that nothing in the creation account in Genesis requires that the moon doesn't reflect the light from the sun. Also, note that men have walked on the moon, and saw that it didn't give off any light of its own. Also, the phases of the moon prove that it has no light of its own.

YHWH's Lion said in post 1:

Again Genesis describing Waters outside of the Firmament (the firmament in which all of the stars, moon and sun are placed)

Click to expand...

Genesis 1:6-7 refers to God creating the earth's atmosphere (the firmament, the 1st heaven, in which the birds fly: Genesis 1:20b) to hold water up in the air (such as in clouds), above and separate from the water in the ocean.

There are 3 heavens (2 Corinthians 12:2b). The 1st heaven is the sky, the atmosphere, in which the birds fly (Genesis 1:20b). The 2nd heaven is outer space, where the sun, moon, and stars reside (Deuteronomy 4:19). Where God resides is the 3rd heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2b, Revelation 4:1-2), and so it is beyond outer space, in the sense of it being in a higher (i.e. a 4th) spatial dimension. And it is a physical place, for Jesus ascended there in his physical resurrection body (Acts 1:9-11, Luke 24:39). And Paul said that he could have visited there in his physical body (2 Corinthians 12:2). Also, Elijah and Enoch were taken up there in their physical bodies (2 Kings 2:11, Genesis 5:24, Hebrews 11:5). And the 2 witnesses will be taken up there in their physical bodies (Revelation 11:11-12).

In the 3rd heaven, there is currently a literal city 1,500 miles cubed (Revelation 21:16), which is called New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:2), the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22), the Jerusalem which is above (Galatians 4:26), and the Father's house (John 14:2, Revelation 21:2-3). In the future, God will create a new earth (a new surface of the earth) and a new heaven (a new 1st heaven, a new atmosphere for the earth) (Revelation 21:1). And then God will come down in New Jerusalem from the 3rd heaven to the new earth to live with people on the new earth (Revelation 21:2-3, Revelation 3:12b). It is New Jerusalem which has the literal pearly gates and streets of gold (Revelation 21:21) which people ascribe to heaven. So what people think of as heaven, in the sense of living in bliss with God, will eventually be on the new earth.

Currently, the 3rd heaven is where paradise is (2 Corinthians 12:2,4). And paradise is where believers go when they die (Luke 23:43,46). So believers go to the 3rd heaven when they die. Also, paradise is where the literal tree of life is (Revelation 2:7). And the tree of life is in New Jerusalem (Revelation 22:2). So when people go to paradise, they go to New Jerusalem.

The earth's 3rd heaven could be high above the north pole (cf. the connection between heaven and the north in Isaiah 14:13, KJV). Regarding what we today call "the northern lights", even though they can been explained by physics, they could still point to the location of the glory of the earth's 3rd heaven. And Psalm 48:2's reference to the north could refer to the location of New Jerusalem in heaven.

YHWH's Lion said in post 1:

In genesis people living to be almost 1000 years old.

Click to expand...

That's right.

The ages of the individuals in Genesis (e.g. Genesis 5:5-32, Genesis 11:11-25) should be taken seriously, just as everything else in the Bible should be taken seriously (Matthew 4:4; 2 Timothy 3:16). There is no reason not to. Even science has found that, just naturally, some multi-cellular organisms don't experience senescence (see "Biological Immortality"). And it is possible for human-cell cultures to live much longer than the current maximum human lifespan of about 120 years (cf. Genesis 6:3). Indeed, human-cell cultures can be made to live indefinitely, so that they become what are called "immortal cells". This is accomplished by causing them to express the telomere-lengthening enzyme telomerase, so that the cells don't shorten their telomeres when they divide (normal cells do shorten them, causing the cells to die when their telomeres get too short). The problem with this is that the cells become cancerous. But God would know how to prevent that, even if humans don't yet know how (cf. Luke 18:27).

YHWH's Lion said in post 1:

The creation of the life on earth being about 6000 years ago.

Click to expand...

Note that the Bible doesn't require that life began on the earth only 6,000 years old. All it requires is that Adam was created about 6,000 years ago. For various scriptures make it possible to estimate the year BC that Adam (as opposed to life on the earth, or the earth itself) was created, by working back from the year BC that Solomon's temple began to be built. Historians say that it began to be built about 966 BC. And the scriptures show that it began to be built 480 years after Israel's Exodus from Egypt (1 Kings 6:1). And Israel had spent 430 years in Egypt before the Exodus (Exodus 12:40-41). And Israel entered Egypt when Jacob was 130 (Genesis 47:9). And Jacob was born when his father Isaac was 60 (Genesis 25:26). And Isaac was born when his father Abraham was 100 (Genesis 21:5). And Abraham was born when his father Terah was about 70 (Genesis 11:26). And Terah was born when his father Nahor was 29 (Genesis 11:24). And Nahor was born when his father Serug was 30 (Genesis 11:22). And Serug was born when his father Reu was 32 (Genesis 11:20). And Reu was born when his father Peleg was 30 (Genesis 11:18).

And Peleg was born when his father Eber was 34 (Genesis 11:16). And Eber was born when his father Salah was 30 (Genesis 11:14). And Salah was born when his father Arphaxad was 35 (Genesis 11:12). And Arphaxad was born when his father Shem was 100 (Genesis 11:10). And Shem was born when his father Noah was 502 (Genesis 11:10 and Genesis 7:6). And Noah was born when his father Lamech was 182 (Genesis 5:28-29). And Lamech was born when his father Methuselah was 187 (Genesis 5:25). And Methuselah was born when his father Enoch was 65 (Genesis 5:21). And Enoch was born when his father Jared was 162 (Genesis 5:18). And Jared was born when his father Mahalaleel was 65 (Genesis 5:15). And Mahalaleel was born when his father Cainan was 70 (Genesis 5:12). And Cainan was born when his father Enos was 90 (Genesis 5:9). And Enos was born when his father Seth was 105 (Genesis 5:6). And Seth was born when his father Adam was 130 (Genesis 5:3).

Adding up the numbers of years above, we see that Adam was created about 4114 BC. This lines up with the fact that our current human civilization began about 4000 BC. If Adam was created about 4114 BC, this means that 6,000 years since Adam's creation were completed back at the end of about 1886 AD, and that the 7th millennium began about 1887 AD. (But this doesn't mean that the millennium of Revelation 20:4-6 has started yet.) Also, it is curious that the next year (1888 AD) Blavatsky published her book (The Secret Doctrine) referring to the "New Age". Also, it is curious that the Mayan calendar begins in 3114 BC, exactly 1,000 years after 4114 BC. Also, the numbers of years in the scriptures referenced above show that Abraham (who was first promised the land of Israel by God: Exodus 32:13) was born about 1,948 years after Adam's creation, just as the modern state of Israel was established in 1948 AD.

-

Regarding the claim above that our current human civilization began about 4000 BC (subsequent to Adam's creation about 4114 BC), by "civilization" is meant "the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained" (Webster's, a print version). "The 4th millennium BC saw major changes in human culture. It marked the beginning of the Bronze Age and the invention of writing, which played a major role in starting recorded history. The city states of Sumer and the kingdom of Egypt were established and grew to prominence" (Wikipedia -- 4th millennium BC).

Regarding "civilization" being defined by Oxford Dictionaries as the "most advanced" stage of human social development and organization, our current human civilization (4th millennium BC to the present) is the most advanced stage of human social development and organization, compared to all known prehistoric (pre-4th millennium BC) stages.

-

Regarding the claim above that our current human civilization began about 4000 BC, by "current" is meant that civilization which began in the 4th millennium BC and continues on today, as opposed to any pre-Adamic human civilizations which may have existed from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years ago.

If there were pre-Adamic civilizations, they could have reached as high a level of technology as in our society today. For the Bible says that "there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us. There is no remembrance of former things" (Ecclesiastes 1:9-11). And even our future technology could have already been invented during past eons, for "that which is to be hath already been" (Ecclesiastes 3:15).

But all past-eons technology on the earth could have been obliterated by God, leaving no trace of it, just as all of our own technology today (and in our future) will eventually be obliterated by God, when "the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up" (2 Peter 3:10b). Here "earth" could mean just the surface of the earth, for the planet itself could continue on forever (Ecclesiastes 1:4, Psalms 104:5, Psalms 78:69b), so that the future "new earth" (2 Peter 3:13, Revelation 21:1) could mean a new surface of the earth.

-

Regarding the claim above that our current human civilization began about 4000 BC, by "human" is meant human civilization in general, as opposed to the civilization of any particular people (e.g. Aztec civilization).

Also, by "human" civilization is meant civilization started by humans as opposed to any non-human animals. For preceding the 1st human civilization, there could have been non-human, mammalian civilizations some 65 to 2 million years ago, started by, for example, intelligent horse-like creatures (cf. the strange horse-like creatures in Revelation 9:17-19). These could have rebelled against God and then been banished from this planet, and forced to live, perhaps, in underground bases on the far side of this planet's moon or on the next planet out from the sun. For the future army of 200 million weird horse-like creatures in Revelation 9:16-19 will have to come from somewhere.

Preceding the first mammalian civilization, there could have been reptilian civilizations some 250 to 65 million years ago, started by, for example, intelligent dinosaur/dragon creatures (cf. Satan being a dragon in Revelation 12:9).

And preceding the first reptilian civilization, there could have been amphibian civilizations some 350 to 250 million years ago, started by, for example, intelligent frog-like creatures, who could have rebelled against God and become unclean spirits (cf. the frog-like creatures/unclean spirits in Revelation 16:13-14).

And preceding the first amphibian civilization, there could have been insect civilizations some 450 to 350 million years ago, started by, for example, intelligent locust-like creatures (cf. the strange locust-like creatures in Revelation 9:3-10), who could have rebelled against God and been banished to a cavern deep underground (cf. the sealed pit in Revelation 9:1b-3,11).

-

Someone might ask: "But don't only humans have the hands required to build things and civilizations?"

The various strange creatures mentioned above could have human-like hands. For they aren't the same as the horses, locusts, frogs, etc. which we can see today. And the Bible shows that non-human creatures can have human-like hands (Ezekiel 1:5-14).

Seems to me alot of "coulds" in that premise... or we could just take God at His word and imagine a God that could do all He says He did. Remember, we have an enemy of God that wants to erase our remembrance of Him. The theory of evolution does just that and any attempt to reconcile the two is just bringing dishonour to our God.

Two things I wanted to mention based on the above post... first, concerning the age of the earth itself, we are told that the earth was formed and slowly cooled over millions of years, right? Fortunately, we know that the bedrock of the earth, the granite, was formed and cooled within dyas. How do we know this? There are small microscopic radioactive particles present in all granite called polonium... these are very shortlived as they quickly out gas and disappear within days as they are decayed into lead. All over the earth in all types of granite are found polonium halos that were frozen in place in the granite as it quickly cooled. The only way these could be present is with a quick formation of the granite.

The second thing I wanted to touch on was the idea that God allowed evolution to have a part in the creation of our world. Let me ask a question... how is the 'new earth' going to be formed? Over millions of years or in an instant? This should give us a clue to how God operates as God is the same yesterday, today and forever.

tz620q said:

On interpreting the mind of the sacred writer. Christians should not talk nonsense to unbelievers.

Click to expand...

Doesn't get much more succinct than that. Maybe we should listen more to theological giants like Augustine and less to those who are his inferiors in every respect.

Jipsah said:

Doesn't get much more succinct than that. Maybe we should listen more to theological giants like Augustine and less to those who are his inferiors in every respect.

Click to expand...

You knew the man did you? Or is it his theories just happen to tickle your itch?

Augustine taught some big errors as well as his correct understandings on Biblical themes... he was in no way infallible in his understanding or teaching. He writings were favourable to the authority early RC church and was therefore well received and venerated by her.

YHWH's Lion said:

Recently I have been thinking about how some christians pick and choose what parts of the bible they will decide to take literally and what parts they will not.
Are only parts of the Bible inspired?

Click to expand...

False dichotomy and false equivalence.

A biblical text can be both inspired and non-literal.

When the creation account in Genesis describes the Moon being a light source of its own and not "reflecting light" as the world teaches.

Would it be so hard for God to inspire the writer to write " the lesser light reflects the greater light"

Again Genesis describing Waters outside of the Firmament (the firmament in which all of the stars, moon and sun are placed)

Click to expand...

The firmament, literally, refers to a hardened dome over the earth. That's what the Hebrew word means and hence the Latin translation firmamentum from whence we get the English word firmament. The Hebrew word used is raqia, a solid, hammered bowl. This is because in the near eastern cosmology in which Genesis, and much of the Old Testament, was written the earth was perceived as a round flat disk atop waters with waters above the earth held in place by the raqia, the solid dome of the sky. It's not just how the ancient Hebrews saw the universe, it's generally how most cultures of the ancient near east saw the universe.

In genesis people living to be almost 1000 years old.

Book of Joshua describing the Sun and the Moon standing still. (not the earth, if earth that we are told is rotating 1000 miles per hour was to suddenly stop, what would happen to the earth?)

would it be so hard for God to inspire the writer to say the earth stood still ?

The creation of the life on earth being about 6000 years ago.

if we as christians believe that Satan is real and has deceived the whole world and is in control of this planet why would it be so hard to believe that he is not controlling all of the important information that is put out to the masses? especially information that would cause people to doubt the Bible?

Click to expand...

Again, false dichotomy. A non-literal reading of certain texts is not a disbelief in Scripture, it is an active engagement with the text to try and understand what the text means and how it should be understood and then applied.

If one believes the devil so powerful as to pervert all natural knowledge, what is to say that Satan isn't deceiving people by tricking them into believing the Bible should be taken literally when it really isn't? At this point the "Satan argument" can be used to disparage and reject any idea that one doesn't personally agree with.

By what authority do christians have the right to choose not to believe some parts and believe others? If someone says, I do not believe in a literal creation account nor Adam and eve, or perhaps some of the other above topics I mentioned. But then say I believe that Jesus is the Son of God and he did many miracles and was raised from the dead. By what reason? Because with that logic a Christian can chose to just believe what ever he or she wants from the bible and no other christian can say anything about it.

thoughts?

Click to expand...

Thoughtful engagement with the biblical texts means understanding that the Bible isn't a monolithic tome, it's not a book; it's a library of books that involves a multitude of literary genre. If one insists on reading the Psalms the same way they read St. Paul's letter to the Romans that isn't being faithful to the Scriptures, it's being lazy.

-CryptoLutheran