Evidence Genesis is just a fable

[JoeyArnold]

But you just advocated that repetition of a concept (e.g., 6 days of creation) affirms that it must be interpreted literally, not metaphorically. You're applying your own hermeneutical rules inconsistently. According to the rules you just provided, the earth must rest on literal pillars and literally must not move because the Bible repeatedly states as much. Why are you contradicting yourself?

Variables alters interpretation. People are always pointing fingers at the Bible, The Bible is contradicting itself." Or, "You're interpretation is contradictory." People tend to do that when they don't understand something. The same can go for you. We could come up with things that would make you look contradictive. They do that with people all time in the political world, like in the presidential race. They try making the other candidate, the other party, sound contradictive or bad.

 

[JoeyArnold]

So you admit that you didn't bother to read the detailed explanations already put forth? In case you missed it, post #20 goes into great detail about why your strawman doesn't hold.

You won't get an answer as to why "Creation is merely a fable," because that is a strawman view that few, if any, people here hold. If you really want to know why the text demands a non-literal interpretation (I don't think "metaphor" is quite the right word either), you can go back and read those posts.

After reading post #20, and the other posts, I am still not satisfied.

 

[JoeyArnold]

If only we actually thought that "seven days is actually seven millions of years." We fully admit that the days are actual days within the context of the story. What we disagree about is what message that story is meant to convey.

Why did God get Moses to share the account of Creation with Israel?

 

[Keachian]

Why did God get Moses to share the account of Creation with Israel?

That's an easy one, Ra the creator God of egyptian mythology is a personification of the Sun, what is the most logical thing to do whether it is true or not but to go look our God is bigger, our God created the egyptian Gods

 

[Melethiel]

After reading post #20, and the other posts, I am still not satisfied.

Well, instead of being so vague, why don't you address the post point by point and tell us what exactly you don't like about it?

 

[Mallon]

Variables alters interpretation.

And what variables would those be, exactly?

 

[Mallon]

Give me a summary to why & how Creation is merely a fable.

Again, the summary you're asking for was already provided twice in this thread. If you can't take the time to read them, why should I take the time to write out a reply to a question that has already been answered?

 

[Mallon]

Is there a difference between Genesis & Psalms, Proverbs, poetic & wisdom books?

Again, you tell me. You're the one who advocated earlier that whatever interpretation we apply to Genesis must also be applied to the rest of the Bible. I take this to mean you believe that there are no literary differences between any books of the Bible.

 

[Siyha]

Two fallacies:

1) A non-literal creation story is "throwing it out". That's like saying if the good Samaritan was not a real person you'd have to throw out the entire story.

2) Accepting the creation story as non-literal means that you must consider other scripture non-literal as well. I heard a great quote the other day, "the bible is not a book, it's a library". That is a great way to look at it. Each individual book, and even parts within a book, should be evaluated on their own for genre and purpose and, yes, historical content.

Without those two bad arguments you have none.

Why did the thread keep going after this post?

 

[JoeyArnold]

That's an easy one, Ra the creator God of egyptian mythology is a personification of the Sun, what is the most logical thing to do whether it is true or not but to go look our God is bigger, our God created the egyptian Gods

That same God & Bible go on to say that the Garden of Eden was in Egypt? That the Israelites are in fact Egyptians? That the Promise Land is in fact Egypt? That mankind originates from Africa, from Egypt, just as the Evolutionists say they do. That the Bible & the Middle east & the Holies of Holies & the Holy Place & Israel & Palestine are all places in Africa, in Egypt? That one of the names for God is Ra, the Egyptian Sun God?

 

[JoeyArnold]

Again, the summary you're asking for was already provided twice in this thread. If you can't take the time to read them, why should I take the time to write out a reply to a question that has already been answered?

I already read it. I want you to rewrite it here:

 

[Melethiel]

That same God & Bible go on to say that the Garden of Eden was in Egypt? That the Israelites are in fact Egyptians? That the Promise Land is in fact Egypt? That mankind originates from Africa, from Egypt, just as the Evolutionists say they do. That the Bible & the Middle east & the Holies of Holies & the Holy Place & Israel & Palestine are all places in Africa, in Egypt? That one of the names for God is Ra, the Egyptian Sun God?

No. Where in the world are you getting all that?

 

[Melethiel]

I already read it. I want you to rewrite it here:

Why don't you show you're serious about understanding our view and actually post a detailed reply to the detailed posts that people have been so kind to give you? Simply stating you disagree is not a good argument.

 

[Mallon]

I already read it. I want you to rewrite it here:

Forget it. You're just being childish.

 

[Keachian]

That same God & Bible go on to say that the Garden of Eden was in Egypt? That the Israelites are in fact Egyptians? That the Promise Land is in fact Egypt? That mankind originates from Africa, from Egypt, just as the Evolutionists say they do. That the Bible & the Middle east & the Holies of Holies & the Holy Place & Israel & Palestine are all places in Africa, in Egypt? That one of the names for God is Ra, the Egyptian Sun God?

This looks to be a deliberate misunderstanding of what I said. I will rephrase in bullet points:

• The Jews were leaving Egypt to go to the promised land
• In both Egypt and the promised land the main religon is the deification of stuff in the world
• The simplest and best way to combat the mythology of where you came from and where you are going is to claim supremacy over both
• Moses knew this and so wrote the account to destroy most if not all polytheistic religions

 

[theFijian]

No, I do.

You might want to read and reflect on what the verse says before saying that.

It emphasizes walking by faith rather than primarily by self-thinking.

Hebrews 4:2
"but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with study of secular science in those who heard it." (NToEV)

Oops, sorry; I mistranslated.

Hebrews 4:2
"but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it." (NKJV)

It's amusing how some people, especially Creationists, love to hit others over the head with certain Bible verses not thinking that it may actually apply to themselves also

 

[theFijian]

Forget it. You're just being childish.

'Childish' is being charitable

 

[Hupomone10]

What do you make of the fact that Luther used your rules of interpretation to argue that the sun revolves around the earth, Hupomone?

I should let this pass, but I can't resist...

Thomas Hartwell Horne: 1780 - 1862
Joseph Angus: 1816 -
Samuel G. Green: contemporary with Angus.
J. Dwight Pentecost: 1915 -
Milton S. Terry: 1898
Charles Fritsch: 1947
Charles L. Feinberg: 1909 - 1995
F. W. Farrar: 1831 - 1903
James MacDonald: - 2011



Martin Luther: 1483 - 1546

(those are the contributors to the rules of interpretation you referred to that I posted. That would be a real trick if Martin Luther could use their rules for anything)

 

[Keachian]

Yet Martin Luther, started Sola Scriptura, which is the basis on which these following Theologians have obviously based their interpretation methods on. The idea has always been there since sola scriptura was proposed, what you have listed can even be traced in some senses to the Early Church Fathers.

 

[Hupomone10]

It's amusing how some people, especially Creationists, love to hit others over the head with certain Bible verses not thinking that it may actually apply to themselves also

I picked this verse because it is one I use daily as part of my devotional time. That fits under the definition of "it applies to me." The blue one, not the pink one.

You guys are fun!


It's interesting how people on a Christian forum interpret a Bible verse shared in a post as being hit over the head with it.