Does believing Genesis is wrong make me a bad Christian?

[expos4ever]

A talking donkey.

A virgin birth.

The blind and crippled healed.

A man walks on water.

A man crucified dead and buried but raised on the third day.

That same man walking through walls and being lifted up back into the heavens until he disappeared from sight.

I will say the same to you, come on man. Do you believe those things?

Given the history of how humans tell stories, having animals talk is invariably a literary device. These other things - virgin birth, healing the sick, and resurrection from the dead are not in this same category.

 

[Andre_b]

If you have already noticed, that Genesis covers a vast period of time. From the creation event up to the era of Moses.

In Genesis you have priesthood (Melchizedek), you have sacrifices, altars. Sin is in the world. We have the law given to Noah. We have covenants.

We have clean and unclean animals in the ark, Noah. We even have a rest day on the seventh day in Genesis. So it is highly likely that the text, was written by folk after the law of Mt Sinai. Unless of course the law was in effect before Moses?

We essentially have a problem in understanding what the purpose of this book of Genesis serves.

Is it a scientific journal regarding the creation of the universe?

Is it a strictly, historical record of every generation of humanity through history?

Is the book of Genesis, a simple religious account written for a very simple audience, thousands of years ago?

The Old Testament is wholly a Jewish text that grounds a Jew in their religious ancestry. The intervention of God in Israel's vast history in choosing, their nation as God's representative nation among all the nations.

So Genesis is compact, simply written, scientifically incomprehensible. Historically not accurate or even precise.

Noah's flood occurred but not a world wide flood.

Abraham existed and was chosen by God.

The genealogy is not accurate, the people mentioned may not be direct descendants, as in the son of preceding person. The Hebrew language did not have words for grandfather or even great grandfather.

The Genesis text is a summary, an overview, of Jewish history. For that purpose it was written. The Genesis text is also deeply symbolic. The tree in the center of the garden may not have been a tree at all. The garden may have represented something more pure. Be very careful when stepping through Genesis, a soft touch is necessary.

So history doesn't exist without the Jews? really? God doesn't reveal anything to Moses. Oh but he does only with the law that's it. Other than that humans wrote stories and God let it be in the bible for fun? There would be no point of adding that into the bible if it wasn't true. It is NOT just Jewish history, it is HUMAN history with a nation as representative of God.

 

[coffee4u]

Given the history of how humans tell stories, having animals talk is invariably a literary device. These other things - virgin birth, healing the sick, and resurrection from the dead are not in this same category.

And what is it about the text that makes you split them into two separate piles?

 

[Tra Phull]

What needs to be SPLIT INTO TWO SEPARATE PILES is Christians.

In one pile - are those who say : "Everything in the Bible is literally true, and anyone who doesn't believe that is deceived by atheists, of the devil, and shouldn't call themself a Christian".

In the other pile are Christians who acknowledge that there are some things figurative not literal, that the SUN did not stand still when Joshua commanded it, that Samson picking up a donkey' s jawbone and killing a THOUSAND enemies before setting it back down is hyperbole - yet in this pile are those who DO INDEED differentiate between virgin birth, walking on water, resurrection, healings and other miracles.

Sigh.

One pile does not insinuate that the other pile is not Christian, one pile does.

Which pile are you in?

 

[Andre_b]

What needs to be SPLIT INTO TWO SEPARATE PILES is Christians.

In one pile - are those who say : "Everything in the Bible is literally true, and anyone who doesn't believe that is deceived by atheists, of the devil, and shouldn't call themself a Christian".

In the other pile are Christians who acknowledge that there are some things figurative not literal, that the SUN did not stand still when Joshua commanded it, that Samson picking up a donkey' s jawbone and killing a THOUSAND enemies before setting it back down is hyperbole - yet in this pile are those who DO INDEED differentiate between virgin birth, walking on water, resurrection, healings and other miracles.

Sigh.

One pile does not insinuate that the other pile is not Christian, one pile does.

Which pile are you in?

Yes I agree, however, you can usually tell by the context, etc. What is metaphors or symbolic. The creation week and many other aspects do not give this impression. The only reason people don't take it literal is because they may believe the many assumptions in science as fact. They don't want to be ridiculed since they are afraid of the authoritive nature of scientists. Science isn't infallible and is just as corrupt as any other field that involves humans.

 

[Tra Phull]

What is figurative, metaphorical or symbolic is not always obvious. Being "afraid of the authoritative nature of scientists" has nothing to do with things for me.

The 1000 year reign in Revelation is an example of something taken literally by some Christians and not so by others, and scientists don't come into play.

It is a matter of literature - apocalyptic literature often says things in non-literal terms.

Creation week, well, it is there in the text that there are 2 creation accounts - one about the whole earth, one focused on the garden.

I don't go around being scared of scientists.

 

[solid_core]

Nobody can disprove what has been proven, obviously. Proof is everywhere that the whole world and all of nature evolved over billions of years, not less than a week. Mass extinctions including the biggest flood in world history are known to have occurred hundreds of millions of years prior to the existence of humans, especially homo sapiens - the last remaining species. I simply cannot for the life of me believe what the Bible says about the Creation and timing of the Great Flood, at least in terms of being the worst ever, is more accurate than what scientists discover. But in my heart I believe the Bible is God's Word and believe in miracles, so I don't want to feel like I am betraying Him in favor of sinners. Am I screwed up about my religion?

No, you are a bad Christian if you behave immorally, not when you just do not accept one specific view about Bible.

Taking the book of Genesis as theologically inspired while scientifically wrong is a way to go for most todays Christians.

Perfect literalism is obviously wrong about many biblical places.

 

[coffee4u]

What needs to be SPLIT INTO TWO SEPARATE PILES is Christians.

In one pile - are those who say : "Everything in the Bible is literally true, and anyone who doesn't believe that is deceived by atheists, of the devil, and shouldn't call themself a Christian".

In the other pile are Christians who acknowledge that there are some things figurative not literal, that the SUN did not stand still when Joshua commanded it, that Samson picking up a donkey' s jawbone and killing a THOUSAND enemies before setting it back down is hyperbole - yet in this pile are those who DO INDEED differentiate between virgin birth, walking on water, resurrection, healings and other miracles.

Sigh.

One pile does not insinuate that the other pile is not Christian, one pile does.

Which pile are you in?

Since your definition of group one is completely flawed your question is unanswerable.

 

[Tra Phull]

My definition of pile one included statements from this very thread - "deceived by atheists" "shouldn't call themself a Christian" "of the devil" - these phrases were posted in this thread.

 

[coffee4u]

My definition of pile one included statements from this very thread - "deceived by atheists" "shouldn't call themself a Christian" "of the devil" - these phrases were posted in this thread.

I believe in literal 6 day creation.

I have never said "Everything in the Bible is literally true" because of course there is poetry and prophesy and symbolism as well.

I have also never said if you don't believe in Genesis as literal that you "shouldn't call yourself a Christian".
I do think if you don't that you are looking at what God offers through a tiny peephole and missing the whole beautiful picture.

But according to you I am the first group and I must think all those things. Which is kind of rude. People are far more complex than two groups.

 

[Zao is life]

Nobody can disprove what has been proven, obviously. Proof is everywhere that the whole world and all of nature evolved over billions of years, not less than a week. Mass extinctions including the biggest flood in world history are known to have occurred hundreds of millions of years prior to the existence of humans, especially homo sapiens - the last remaining species. I simply cannot for the life of me believe what the Bible says about the Creation and timing of the Great Flood, at least in terms of being the worst ever, is more accurate than what scientists discover. But in my heart I believe the Bible is God's Word and believe in miracles, so I don't want to feel like I am betraying Him in favor of sinners. Am I screwed up about my religion?

I believe the history of creation given in Genesis is written in story form. We read about the fruit of the "Tree" of Life - but elsewhere we are told that this is the Word of God (John 1:1-4), and Jesus also likens it to water (John 6:63; John 4:14). In Revelation, it's a river (Revelation 22:1) and the "Tree" of Life is in the middle of the river.

Think of salesman approaching a woman while her husband is not around to sell her a product: "The serpent" tells the woman that what she heard about what would happen if she eats the fruit of the "Tree" of knowledge of good and evil, is a lie - then he tells her about all the supposed "benefits" she would obtain from the product (the fruit of the "Tree") if she eats it. So Eve "sees" all the supposed "benefits", and she eats, and she gives to Adam, and he eats.

"The serpent/dragon" is a symbol throughout the Bible for the adversary (the Satan). The "Tree" of Life can only be a symbol for the Word of God and Holy Spirit, the "Tree" of knowledge of good and evil likewise, a symbol.

So this, to me, is an account of something that actually took place, but written in story form - and if that's the case, then the "days" of creation (may be?) any amount of years, or tens or hundreds of thousands of years, or even millions of years.

PS: We will never know before Jesus comes back.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Where did 3 billion come from? I was always taught Earth's age is 4.6 billion years old in school. Later the number was changed to 4.5 billion with no given explanation.

You can prove cats have always been obligate carnivores since the first feline species was made. Who can deny the purpose of triangular teeth and why four are long enough to cut through prey animals?

The actual age of the earth is not really known. The point is that the evidence strongly suggests that it has been around a very long time. It is not really important to me whether it is 3 billion or 4.5 billion or some other number. What effect does being off by a few billion years in the age of the earth have on us?

 

[Job 33:6]

Nobody can disprove what has been proven, obviously. Proof is everywhere that the whole world and all of nature evolved over billions of years, not less than a week. Mass extinctions including the biggest flood in world history are known to have occurred hundreds of millions of years prior to the existence of humans, especially homo sapiens - the last remaining species. I simply cannot for the life of me believe what the Bible says about the Creation and timing of the Great Flood, at least in terms of being the worst ever, is more accurate than what scientists discover. But in my heart I believe the Bible is God's Word and believe in miracles, so I don't want to feel like I am betraying Him in favor of sinners. Am I screwed up about my religion?

Well, for many of us, we simply ponder the meaning of scripture in light of science. Perhaps Genesis isn't as we may have thought it was in the past, but as God's inspired word, it is truth. It's simply a matter of understanding it's nature.

I'm the book of Mark, there were times where the disciples didn't understand what Jesus was trying to teach about who He was. To the point where in Mark 8:32-34 Mark attempted to rebuke Jesus. Jesus said "Get behind me Satan!" ""You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns".

In many parts of scripture, believers struggle to understand the nature of Jesus and God at large. But book after book, we are taught that understanding God is a process that takes time and deep thought.

Nobody just wakes up in the morning and has automatic philosophical mastery of all of scripture. We take time and reflect, and grow in Christ.

And don't let the haters in the room take away from your personal search and growth. Paul consistently fought to unite the body of Christ, despite our occasional differences. And we know that Jesus' final commandment truly is the most challenging. The last thing anyone should be doing is enacting the "holier than thou attitude".

There are also plenty of good articles on uniting science and faith here: BioLogos - God's Word. God's World.

It should also be noted that while some say that science is man's word and not God's word, the obvious response is that in science we are simply describing nature. It isn't man's word that the sun emits light, it simply is, even if we write scientific papers about the sun. No more than it is man's word that earth is old, it simply is. And it is Good.

 

[Leet]

It's not "wrong," it's just not literal. No one will understand it in our earthly state but the many mysteries will become clear in Heaven, I believe.

 

[misput]

Nobody can disprove what has been proven, obviously. Proof is everywhere that the whole world and all of nature evolved over billions of years, not less than a week. Mass extinctions including the biggest flood in world history are known to have occurred hundreds of millions of years prior to the existence of humans, especially homo sapiens - the last remaining species. I simply cannot for the life of me believe what the Bible says about the Creation and timing of the Great Flood, at least in terms of being the worst ever, is more accurate than what scientists discover. But in my heart I believe the Bible is God's Word and believe in miracles, so I don't want to feel like I am betraying Him in favor of sinners. Am I screwed up about my religion?

No, just confused but willing to admit it, unlike most: )

 

[d taylor]

Nobody can disprove what has been proven, obviously. Proof is everywhere that the whole world and all of nature evolved over billions of years, not less than a week. Mass extinctions including the biggest flood in world history are known to have occurred hundreds of millions of years prior to the existence of humans, especially homo sapiens - the last remaining species. I simply cannot for the life of me believe what the Bible says about the Creation and timing of the Great Flood, at least in terms of being the worst ever, is more accurate than what scientists discover. But in my heart I believe the Bible is God's Word and believe in miracles, so I don't want to feel like I am betraying Him in favor of sinners. Am I screwed up about my religion?

If you want an example of how God likes, His children, believing the lies of man over His word. Then read the report of the 12 spies in Numbers 13 and 14.

Then the Lord said to Moses: “How long will these people reject Me? And how long will they not believe Me,

I believe the ones who believed in the lies/report spent 40 years wandering in a desert (to die) and the ones who actually told the lies died, by the plague (that very day). But the two (Caleb and Joshua) who believed God and His promise (that He would give this land to the Hebrews) lived and not only lived, but God brought them into the land 40 years later.

God always has a small remnant that will believe Him (His word).

But My servant Caleb, because he has a different spirit in him and has followed Me fully, I will bring into the land where he went, and his descendants shall inherit it.

Look at the sorry state the church is in today, is that a surprise no. Why because take a look at how many denominations reject God word over the lies of science/man (that is inspired by satan). It was easy pickings for satan to shut down churches across the land/earth, not much fully belief/following in churches these days.

 

[Brightmoon]

The universe is about 14 billion years old...
I might have misspoken...
but yes,,,the earth is not 6,000 years old.
And it's a shame that Christians have to be taken for such fools for believing this.

. I know quite a few atheists who became atheists BECAUSE they realized that the main ideas of young earth creationism were wrong and or that evolution/ common descent was an accurate description of life

 

[Brightmoon]

Yeah let's trust scientists over our Creator, that's a great advice, what could go wrong. If God said it then it is and I don't need people to tell me otherwise. If you believe in God believe in His word. If you don't are you are picking what you want to believe or not, I have a bad news for you.

Mainstream scientists just report what Nature says about itself

I believe that you and others that don't believe in Genesis are missing out on a beautiful picture. Like looking at the Sistine chapel through a cardboard tube. I think you are missing out on how scripture harmonizes with itself. When I read about the garden of Eden I see it as a foreshadowing of the New Heavens and New World. When I read that Jesus is the second Adam I know it is referring back to how Adam fell into sin and how Jesus did not. When God killed an animal to clothe Adam and eve I know it is a picture of being clothed in the blood of Jesus.

I don't see any proof of evolution.
I see creatures which look similar to one another. You probably see those and say "Common ancestry"
I look at them and says "The same God made them all out of the same material"
The evidence there didn't change, but the way it is interpreted can do.

Scientist date a fossil and give an age.
I say they don't have all the facts, that they are doing tests without all the information. They have also assumed things Inaccuracies in radiocarbon dating
Also who says that the facts they have now were the same at creation, the fall or the flood? It's quite obvious that some laws governing the world changed. At creation animals only ate plants, something changed there.

Then you have the age of the earth which does not have to match the age of creation. It says the earth was void, who says it didn't sit there for an extended period of time before God created on it? The Bible doesn't say. So its also possible for the rock to be a billion years old and the creation to be 6-15 thousand years old.

The Bible says that there was no death before sin, that man sinned and then death came in. Evolution requires a lot of death, millions of years of death. This is a very big problem with evolution and the Bible.

Of course, you are free to think whatever you like.

If it weren’t for fetal cell DEATH you wouldn’t have fingers or toes . Fetal hands start as paddles .

No they don't the dinosaurs were there. Not very complicated. Why are there still fresh dinosaur tissue if it was 65 million years ago? Why are there many buried near the surface? and it goes on and on.

Mummified and mineralized tissue is not fresh . The technique Mary Schweitzer found was due to a then-new-to-science natural preservation technique.

Given the history of how humans tell stories, having animals talk is invariably a literary device. These other things - virgin birth, healing the sick, and resurrection from the dead are not in this same category.

obviously you don’t read much mythology as these are literary devices in other older (some extinct) faiths

 

[Andre_b]

. I know quite a few atheists who became atheists BECAUSE they realized that the main ideas of young earth creationism were wrong and or that evolution/ common descent was an accurate description of life

I became a Christian largely because of the YEC theory. I was an atheist for around 15-20 years prior but raised Catholic as a child. Many have come to the exact opposite conclusion. I know other atheists that were in that boat as well that came to believe because of YEC.

So explain to me why you believe what you see now has always been this way? Explain to me how billions of years of death and suffering fit in the narrative of the bible? Why would God not even mention 1 thing about that part of history? Do you believe in evolution?

 

[hedrick]

. I know quite a few atheists who became atheists BECAUSE they realized that the main ideas of young earth creationism were wrong and or that evolution/ common descent was an accurate description of life

And they thought all Christians believed in a young earth? Arrrgggghhhhh....