First post to this board...looking for some insight

[filly]

I posted the below paragraph in another forum, but figured I'd get the most response from here:


So I can be a Christian and still have questions/doubts about a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation? I believe God exists. I want to live my life in accordance with Him. I just don't know if I believe in the 6 days of creation. Scientific evidence refutes it, so I have a problem. This is one reason I feel I can't be saved. What are the "early man" fossils? I don't want to believe that we came from them. What are the other options? Are they totally different species, such as birds, fish, etc., but they just happen to very closely resemble human beings?

 

[Aron-Ra]

I posted the below paragraph in another forum, but figured I'd get the most response from here:


So I can be a Christian and still have questions/doubts about a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation? I believe God exists. I want to live my life in accordance with Him. I just don't know if I believe in the 6 days of creation. Scientific evidence refutes it, so I have a problem. This is one reason I feel I can't be saved. What are the "early man" fossils? I don't want to believe that we came from them. What are the other options? Are they totally different species, such as birds, fish, etc., but they just happen to very closely resemble human beings?

They are human beings from Homo habilis on. They're just not exactly like modern Homo sapiens.

 

[raphael_aa]

Hi and welcome.

Perhaps you shouldn't be too concerned with what you 'want' to believe. I would suggest being commited to the truth wherever it leads.

Your 'salvation' has absolutely NOTHING to do with your interpretation of Genisis. I'm afraid you've bought into the lie that 'real' christians read scripture literally. I would suggest exploring the whole diverse world of christianity to find a vibrant affirming faith.

 

[tryptophan]

You can absolutely not believe in a literal Genesis and still believe in Jesus. That is perfectly all right, and there are many Christians who feel this way. Here is a link to show just how many different origins views there are.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wic.html

You can believe whatever you want to about fossils. However, the scientific evidence says that we do have ape ancestors. That's just what the evidence is. Of course, being as this is America, you can believe whatever you want to.

 

[filly]

You can believe whatever you want to about fossils. However, the scientific evidence says that we do have ape ancestors. That's just what the evidence is. Of course, being as this is America, you can believe whatever you want to.

Ok, so if I believe the scientific evidence, then where do I stand? I can't possible become a Christian, can I? From what I understand of the Bible, God created man, not ape ancestors. Do I have to blindly reject the scientific evidence in front of me in order to be a Christian?

 

[random_guy]

Ok, so if I believe the scientific evidence, then where do I stand? I can't possible become a Christian, can I? From what I understand of the Bible, God created man, not ape ancestors. Do I have to blindly reject the scientific evidence in front of me in order to be a Christian?

The bible states that God did create man, but it never states how. Personally, I believe God used natural processes to create the entire Universe. There's no conflict between science and Christianity unless you choose to create that conflict yourself.

 

[raphael_aa]

Ok, so if I believe the scientific evidence, then where do I stand? I can't possible become a Christian, can I? From what I understand of the Bible, God created man, not ape ancestors. Do I have to blindly reject the scientific evidence in front of me in order to be a Christian?

Of course you can be christian! If you want to. I'll repeat: You DON"T have to read the Bible literally to be a REAL christian! Most mainline denominations accept evolution. Many believe Genisis is allegorical. As we are fond of saying here: evolution does NOT mean atheism.

 

[filly]

Of course you can be christian! If you want to. I'll repeat: You DON"T have to read the Bible literally to be a REAL christian! Most mainline denominations accept evolution. Many believe Genisis is allegorical. As we are fond of saying here: evolution does NOT mean atheism.

So, in Genesis, your opinion is that "man" could very well be a "lesser" being than what we are today? In other words, the ape-like creatures we learned about in grade school? Subsequently, then, we have evolved from these ancestors? Adam and Eve, then, were what?

 

[JohnR7]

They are human beings from Homo habilis on. They're just not exactly like modern Homo sapiens.

Which is the same thing as saying they are not quite human, so why call them human? I think you have a different idea of what it means to be human anyways. We use to use the term humanoid. They have a vague outward appearance of being human but have nothing really human on the inside.

 

[raphael_aa]

So, in Genesis, your opinion is that "man" could very well be a "lesser" being than what we are today? In other words, the ape-like creatures we learned about in grade school? Subsequently, then, we have evolved from these ancestors? Adam and Eve, then, were what?

This is my opinion. Adam and Eve were not real people. The sory of Adam and Eve is a primative culture's attempts to understand their origins and their relationship to God. In doing this, they created a myth with real power. The great truths it confirms are that God created all, that suffering exists but hope is possible,that men and women are of equal value, that evil exists but is ultimately defeated, and on and on. Just because it isn't literally true doesn't mean it doesn't contain truth.

 

[filly]

This is my opinion. Adam and Eve were not real people. The sory of Adam and Eve is a primative culture's attempts to understand their origins and their relationship to God. In doing this, they created a myth with real power. The great truths it confirms are that God created all, that suffering exists but hope is possible,that men and women are of equal value, that evil exists but is ultimately defeated, and on and on. Just because it isn't literally true doesn't mean it doesn't contain truth.

Thanks for your opinion. How do you believe that we got to where we are today? When God created "us", were we not the humans that we are today? What about the lineage of all the Homo xxxxx? Do you believe these were totally different species from us, or did we evolve from them? And can you believe we evolved from them and become a Christian?

 

[raphael_aa]

Thanks for your opinion. How do you believe that we got to where we are today? When God created "us", were we not the humans that we are today? What about the lineage of all the Homo xxxxx? Do you believe these were totally different species from us, or did we evolve from them? And can you believe we evolved from them and become a Christian?

Humans are part of the ongoing creative work of God. Our nonhuman ancestors were too, as are trees, ants, rocks and pizzas. Perhaps humans are 'special' in the way they can consciously experience and respond to God. I do know that humans seem to be the only 'problem child' of God.

 

[Aron-Ra]

Which is the same thing as saying they are not quite human, so why call them human?

Because they are human, not "not quite human".

I think you have a different idea of what it means to be human anyways.

I'm sure of it. Any member of the genus, Homo is a human. Homo means human, get it? Homo habilis = handyman. Homo erectus = erect man. Homo neandertalensis = man from New man's Valley. Homo sapiens = wise man. But they're all men.

We use to use the term humanoid. They have a vague outward appearance of being human but have nothing really human on the inside.

You can't use "humanoid" for a couple of reasons. One because that term only applies to non-human hominines. That and the scientific term for ape is hominiod, and it means humanoid. So even gibbons and orangutans are humanoids. And you can't use it because it isn't vague at all. For example, there is every reason to believe that Homo erectus could speak articulate language and even breed both of his descendant species, sapiens and Neandertals. And if you saw Homo habilis sittin on a crowded pew in your church, you might have thought him to be an "ape-man". But if you saw him in his own surroundings, you would consider him nothing less than a man, and that's what the Latin word, "Homo" means.

 

[Linux98]

Of course you can be christian! If you want to. I'll repeat: You DON"T have to read the Bible literally to be a REAL christian! Most mainline denominations accept evolution. Many believe Genisis is allegorical. As we are fond of saying here: evolution does NOT mean atheism.

You need to read the Bible the way it was written. If a section of the Bible was written as a historical narrative you need to read it as such. The idea you must understand the Bible "literally" is a little misleading; you don't take a poetic verse and apply a literal interpretation of the verse.

However, Genesis is certainly not allegorical. The literary style of Genesis is a "Hebrew narrative" and you should read it as such.

 

[Ron21647]

Here is a link to the first of three posts I made on this topic.

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=14287766#post14287766

Ron

 

[Sinai]

So I can be a Christian and still have questions/doubts about a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation?

Jesus said, "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free." He didn't say you were not permitted to have questions. The fact that you have questions probably means you are thinking--and that's generally a very good thing.

I believe God exists. I want to live my life in accordance with Him. I just don't know if I believe in the 6 days of creation. Scientific evidence refutes it, so I have a problem.

"Day" is a common English translation. The Hebrew word that is used is [font=&quot]יוֹם (pronounced yom)[/font], which is most commonly translated to mean day or period of time, although it can also mean daylight, an era, an epoch, an age, or an unspecified length of time. Scientific evidence does not refute all those different meanings for yom. Indeed, it may not necessarily even refute the six consecutive 24-hour periods of time if those 144 hours were measured forward in time at the speed of the outward flow of creation (as opposed to backward in time against the flow of creation).

This is one reason I feel I can't be saved.

No matter which interpretation you think is most accurate, none of them are salvation issues or otherwise affect whether you can be saved.

What are the "early man" fossils? I don't want to believe that we came from them. What are the other options? Are they totally different species, such as birds, fish, etc., but they just happen to very closely resemble human beings?

Although scientific evidence confirms the biblical contention that human beings come at the tail end of the creative process, it also shows that humans have been on our planet for quite a while.

 

[Sinai]

Ok, so if I believe the scientific evidence, then where do I stand? I can't possible become a Christian, can I? From what I understand of the Bible, God created man, not ape ancestors. Do I have to blindly reject the scientific evidence in front of me in order to be a Christian?

[font=&quot]I suggest that if you think that scripture and science seem to be contradicting each other, it is very likely that you either do not understand what science is actually presenting or that you do not fully understand what the Bible may be saying--or both. In other words, it may be time to check both the most credible scientific sources available, and to check what the actual Hebrew or Greek scriptures say--and what the range of meanings is for the words and phrases in question. I know of no reason why a Christian cannot both accept the evidence of modern science and also believe the Biblical account of creation.
[/font]

 

[Sinai]

So, in Genesis, your opinion is that "man" could very well be a "lesser" being than what we are today? In other words, the ape-like creatures we learned about in grade school? Subsequently, then, we have evolved from these ancestors? Adam and Eve, then, were what?

Thanks for your opinion. How do you believe that we got to where we are today? When God created "us", were we not the humans that we are today? What about the lineage of all the Homo xxxxx? Do you believe these were totally different species from us, or did we evolve from them? And can you believe we evolved from them and become a Christian?

Hebrew has two words for soul, nefesh (or nephesh) and neshama (or nishmath), and both come into play in the first two chapters of Genesis. When Genesis 1:21 tells us that “God created…every living creature,” it signifies that all animals (humans included) are infused with the nefesh or soul of life--i.e., they are living creatures. When humans are mentioned a few verses later (Genesis 1:27 and 2:7), the text tells of a further creation that distinguishes humans from lower animals: The third “creation” mentioned in the first chapter of Genesis is of our human soul (or God's spirit or God's breath of life or the capacity to fellowship with God), our neshama (the first two “creations” were of the universe and of life).



The closing of Genesis 2:7 has a subtlety lost in the English: It is usually translated as: “…and [God] breathed into his nostrils the neshama of life and the adam became a living soul” (Gen. 2:7). Dr. Gerald Schroeder has noted that the Hebrew text actually states: “…and the adam became to a living soul.” Over 700 years ago, Nahmanides (one of the most respected of the Jewish theologians) wrote that the “to” (the Hebrew letter lamed prefixed to the word “soul” in the verse) is superfluous from a grammatical stance and so must be there to teach something. Lamed, he noted, indicates a change in form and may have been placed there to describe mankind as progressing through stages of mineral, plant, fish, and animal. Finally, upon receiving the neshama, that creature which had already been formed became a human. He concludes his extensive commentary on the implications of this lamed by saying that “it may be that the verse is stating that [prior to receiving the neshama] it was a completely living being and [by the neshama] it was transformed into another man.”


According to Nahmanides, the biblical text has told us that before the neshama, there could have been something like a man that was not quite like a human being in that it lacked an eternal soul [which, I might add, would not show up in a fossil, x-ray or cat-scan]. Note that Nahmanides' writings preceded discoveries of modern paleontology by hundreds of years--and the Bible said it 3000 years before discoveries of modern science.

[font=&quot][/font]

 

[JookieRed]

To filly, rafael_aa, randomguy and others...

Why are you Christians?

More and more I'm seeing people who believe in God but realize that much of modern science is hard to dispute.

You believe there is a god. Fine. Why the Christian god? There are obviously things in the bible that you don't take literally. Good for you. But there are lots of folks that would say you aren't "true Christians" then.

If you are going to pick and choose which parts of the bible you want to believe, why believe any of it? Explore other schools of thought. Why not Deism, Pantheism, whateverism?

 

[gluadys]

If you are going to pick and choose which parts of the bible you want to believe, why believe any of it? Explore other schools of thought. Why not Deism, Pantheism, whateverism?
[/size]

Actually, jookiered, you are thinking like a creationist.

We don't pick and choose which parts of the bible to believe, though creationists often accuse us of that.

We believe all of it. But we study it in the light of modern knowledge to determine how we will believe it (as history, poetry, legend, or whatever.)

I have explored other modes of thought, both philosophical and religious (e.g. Buddhism, HInduism, Taoism, as well as those you named.) I keep coming back to Christianity for two reasons: 1. it is the faith I was raised in and I feel at home in it (like being abroad for a long time and returning to where I can speak English). Christianity, has provided me with my vocabulary of faith. 2. I find it more satisfying in many ways than other faiths. That may simply be because I don't know the others well enough. But I have to go with where I am at right now.