• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured Gen 1 in a vacuum

Discussion in 'Creation & Theistic Evolution' started by DamianWarS, Jul 10, 2019.

  1. DamianWarS

    DamianWarS Follower of Isa Al Masih Supporter

    +1,461
    Christian
    Private
    Who said they were well known? WWII is a highly documented event in history before, during and after. The creation account is documented 2500 years after it happened... at best. Let's not begin to add things to scripture just to support a literal account. If we say Adam to Methuselah to Noah to Shem is the connection then why is Abraham the only one who gets it? Did Shem not father other lines? Did his brothers not father their own? Why are the Hebrews the only ones? None of this can be answered because none of it is spoken about in scripture including these accounts being passed down since Adam. If we are to assume anything its that God himself gave these accounts to Moses.

    Read the accounts for yourself. When Abraham walks into the picture time slows down and the accounts are delicately preserved and highly valued. This is unlike pre-Abrahamic accounts that are very myth like, loose in detail and inconsistent not to mention are analogous to other competing accounts of the same.

    They do have details like that given to build the Ark but why such odd information to pass down to generation to generation? The value of these accounts are different than the value of the Abrahamic accounts. What makes them so different? Do you really think these accounts are passed down? It would make more sense that God gave these accounts to Moses.
     
  2. d taylor

    d taylor Well-Known Member

    914
    +393
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    Still you have not answered Acts 17:26
     
  3. JacksBratt

    JacksBratt Searching for Truth

    +3,250
    Canada
    Protestant
    Married
    I give up....

    My point was...... that length of time... back then... was not the same as now.. when a generation is 70 years... when a generation was more like 500 - 700 years...

    Information was also compressed... as far as history... 100 years in the past... was not any more history to them than something last year is history for me.
     
  4. Ronald

    Ronald Exhortations Supporter

    +702
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    When we want to know the origin of anything, we ask for the facts, the details. We expect a literal explanation. This is how we want it. When a crime is committed, the police officer investigating the incident asks for the facts. In a court of law, they ask for the facts. People don't answer them in symbolic language. "Well, I really want to tell you exactly how it went down but I'm going to tell you in an allegory that might sound conflicting and that you may not understand ..." Your answer to the authorities better be straight forward, the facts, the whole truth.
    IS THIS how we communicate and receive information, through symbolic puzzles that cause confliction and controversy? Is this how God begins His story of creation? Does He not want us to understand? Jesus was very clear. When symbolism is used in scripture , it is usually followed by an explanation. The parables were announced as such and explained.
    NO! THIS VERY IMPORTANT EVENT CALLED CREATION WAS EXPLAINED TO US IN SIMPLE, LITERAL WORDS THAT WE CAN TRUST - WE EXPECT NOTHING LESS THAN A CLEAR EXPLANATION, THE TRUTH.
     
  5. DamianWarS

    DamianWarS Follower of Isa Al Masih Supporter

    +1,461
    Christian
    Private
    this is how westerners want it. wasn't it you who said I was thinking too much like a westerner? The accounts are still truth, non-literal doesn't mean non-truth.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2019 at 12:59 AM
  6. DamianWarS

    DamianWarS Follower of Isa Al Masih Supporter

    +1,461
    Christian
    Private
    time is not compressed, the accounts are. you are treating these characters and events as non-literal and you don't even know it. non-literal characters don't do anything outside of what we are told. They don't have aspirations outside of what we are told, they don't have any history outside of what we are told, they don't eat or sleep unless we are told this, they don't kill an animal to eat for every day they live. In reality, if someone lives 100 years, then 100 years of stuff happened to them and 100 years of memories; time is no more compressed then than it is now.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2019 at 1:01 AM
  7. DamianWarS

    DamianWarS Follower of Isa Al Masih Supporter

    +1,461
    Christian
    Private
    I'm not sure what you want me to say about this. this neither proves or disproves a literal account. the point in Acts is built from the information provided in the accounts which are ordained by God so are reliable truth.

    Ancient Hebrews think differently than us. A man may die without a son and his brother may produce the male offspring by way of proxy. the son is raised in the name of the deceased brother. Westerns don't accept this, we would say something like "but really the son is the living brother's son" but that is not the thinking, the son is the deceased brothers son and what is literal doesn't matter. This also is true for Gentiles being grafted into Isreal. Gentiles, in this case, are not naturally from the root but what is literal doesn't matter and Gentiles can still be of Isreal.

    this is similar for non-literal accounts, especially in oral ancient cultures. it doesn't matter what is literal, what matters is what is declared truth. I point out the flaws of looking at it in a literal view (like looking at the DNA of the son) but the flaws don't matter, and if it's literal also doesn't matter. The account is grafted in as truth and so it is truth.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2019 at 1:57 AM
  8. JacksBratt

    JacksBratt Searching for Truth

    +3,250
    Canada
    Protestant
    Married
    I wish you well in your quest to understand this portion of scripture... God bless.
     
  9. d taylor

    d taylor Well-Known Member

    914
    +393
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    Personally i believe you bring a lot of unnecessary ideas into you reading of the Bible. No wonder you can not take the text as given: example Adam is not actually Adam but it really is humanity.
    So instead of God beginning His creation of humanity with one man and woman God actually created the human race with what 1,000 , 10,000, 50,000 100,000 1,000,000. Whats the number i am sure the Bible would address this some where.

    So then what do you do with these numbers and how sin entered the world. So everyone created partake of the fruit and that is actually how sinned came into the world or do also not take that as it is given in the bible.

    Just like in you opening comment by stating that there are three days of separating and three days of creation and one day of rest.

    When actually on the first day God creates light, the second day God created the raqia (firmament, vault, expanse) that separates the waters (above and below) the third day God brings forth or it could be said created the land so creating is seen from day one to day six.


    Acts 17 proves that your belief that Adam stands for humanity is not correct.

    This is the trap of using human reasoning to twist the meaning of a phrase into something you want it to mean.
    The Biblical way to avoid that trap of bringing your ideas into the text. Establish every matter in the mouth of two or three witnesses. If we trust God to fulfill his word, he will follow his own teaching. Therefore, everything that we need to know and learn in the Bible most likely, will be given in the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses. I say most likely, because i have not read every single account in the Bible and can say that that is absolutely true.

    A good example of this is in Job 26:7 I know that that verse is mistranslated where it has been translated to say, the earth hangs on nothing.

    There is no where else in the Bible that supports the saying that the earth hangs on nothing. But there are verses that state the earth is set on pillars or has foundations.

    So actually Job 26:7
    The Hebrew is —
    neteh tsephoon ol tehoo tehleh arets ol belimeh,
    The proper translation of which is:
    "He spreadeth out the North over the desolate' place (the abyss of waters), and supporteth the Earth upon
    fastenings."

    Which is supported by the Bible where as the earth hangs on nothing is not supported by the Bible.
     
  10. DamianWarS

    DamianWarS Follower of Isa Al Masih Supporter

    +1,461
    Christian
    Private
    All Hebrew names have Hebrew meanings. Adam is the word for mankind. the strongs KJV counts this word occurring 552 in the OT. it is only translated as the name Adam 13 times, the remainder has a more broad definition, most of which explicitly is referring to man. I couldn't find a single verse of this word being translated as "Adam" in Gen 1:26 and if Gen 1 was isolated, which it literary style would suggest it started this way, it would suggest the creation of mankind (plural) rather than man (singular)

    remember I'm agnostic to what happened. I don't know how many God first created and I'm certainly not going put a number in Gen 1 as the text does not support this. I'm merely pointing out that the text itself suggests mankind as a mass noun rather than a singularity (or pair) and I'm not alone on this.

    again, I'm agnostic to what actually happened so I don't do anything with "these numbers" as it would be irresponsible to start some hamartiology based upon some made up number that the text cannot support, according to Gen 1.

    Gen 1 actually doesn't tell me I'm sinful so it's an uncomment aspect of the account. I learn this from Gen 2-3 (a different account with a different goal). if Gen 1 suggests mankind as a mass noun and Gen 2 tells us, 1 male and 1 female, these don't have to overlap. they can exist as separate accounts and we can learn from what they are trying to tell us.

    the word "create" (BARA) is not used in the first 3 days. it is first used in 1:1 of course, which seem to act as an opening statement (then complimented with the closing statements of 2:1-3) it isn't used again until the 5th day. I am not using words the text doesn't use, the first 3 days seem to be about separating light from dark, waters from sky, land from water but God does speak into being these things as well. You might see this as a arbitary point and rather just call it all create but the Hebrew for creating has more concrete meaning of shaping or forming... even fattening and it assumes something already there that is manipulated into something new.

    Gen 1 "adam" does mean the name "Adam" and not one translation uses the name. I do not reject that God made 1 man and 1 woman to popular the earth, it's even a scientific view, I'm just saying Gen 1 seems to refer to "adam" as a mass noun. This doesn't demand that God created 1,000,000 people in one go but it also doesn't demand God created 1 man only. Again this is Gen 1 in a vacuum, passages like Acts 17 draws upon the idea that God was intimately involved in make all nations through 1 man having significant spiritual implications. What is more important? The spiritual meaning of the account of the literal, I goal the account is to deliberately foreshadow the Christ in these details and this is by far the most important aspect. If there was actually 1 man-1 female really doesn't matter, what matters is what it points to.

    I'm not sure where you're going with this. Ancient Hebrew is an extremely concrete language so there's going to be some odd ways it phrases things as it develops abstracts through concretes. I think it would be irresponsible to superimpose this verse over some scientific claim especially from the book of Job a poetic genre.

    With that said your 2 to 3 witnesses is good for verifiable and responsible doctrine but it in itself is not really a biblical hermeneutical approach it is a man-made approach to keep more sound doctrine which by the way it itself cannot be biblically verified by 2-3 witnessing within scripture. For example, let's take the passage 1 Cor 13:10. What is "the perfect"? some say it is the completion of the canon or the initial wave of the established church. This is a widely accepted perspective however nowhere in scripture is this moment talked about so it fails the 2-3 witness approach. I for one disagree with this interpretation as well as see the perfect analogous with an eschatological event which I think is the only verifiable interpretation. I'm not sure what you think of this verse but it's an example of how people don't care about 2-3 witnesses if it doesn't suit them (perhaps to my discredit).

    However, I am not robbing the truth from these accounts which is the important part of them. I'm saying a strictly literal view is somewhat flawed and doesn't work and it also seeks to distract us too much trying to reconcile them or fixated on there literal aspect too much that we miss the point. table the literal aspect and focus on what the account is truely trying to say.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019 at 7:41 AM
  11. d taylor

    d taylor Well-Known Member

    914
    +393
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    So here is your theory in Genesis 1 God created mankind (how many you do not state). Then in Genesis 2 God creates another man that God will use to either establish man as un-sinful and acquiring permanent state of eternal life or either this man will establish mankind as sinful and bring death into God's creation.
     
Loading...