Genesis is a lie. Question for christians...

[mandyangel]

Look at what Genesis says...

Genesis 2:1-4 (NKJV)
Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens...

It says clearly that the biblical creation account is the "history of the heavens and the earth". If the creation account is not true, then the book of Genesis is a lie.

If Genesis is a lie, then the origin of the concept of sin is also a lie, so why believe in a messiah coming to save people from sin?

I don't understand why anyone who doesn't believe the biblical account of creation would want to be a christian.

If you don't believe the biblical account of creation, what do you believe, why, and how is it logical to believe as you do?

Thats the problem when people try to "read into" or "interpret" the Bible. The Bible means exactly what it says. It's God's law and its very direct. There is the scripture ONLY. The "interpretation" is just a game for people to try to get the Bible to say something that it doesn't. God's word is the same yesterday, today, tommorrow.

 

[Assyrian]

Jesus didn't have a problem with interpretation. Luke 24:25 And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?" 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. What sort of passage do you think Jesus was talking about here and how directly did they speak of Jesus and his suffering?

 

[jpcedotal]

Look at what Genesis says...

Genesis 2:1-4 (NKJV)
Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens...

It says clearly that the biblical creation account is the "history of the heavens and the earth". If the creation account is not true, then the book of Genesis is a lie.

If Genesis is a lie, then the origin of the concept of sin is also a lie, so why believe in a messiah coming to save people from sin?

I don't understand why anyone who doesn't believe the biblical account of creation would want to be a christian.

If you don't believe the biblical account of creation, what do you believe, why, and how is it logical to believe as you do?

People, claiming to be Christians, tear out the parts of the Bible that they do not agree with.

 

[Keachian]

People, claiming to be Christians, tear out the parts of the Bible that they do not agree with.

Marcionites, and Red-letterers sure, but they're rather fringey, though I suspect you think it is about TE that you are serving these baseless claims against, where is your basis for these accusations? For instance you'd probably say that I don't agree with Genesis 1:1-2:3 yet I know this passage of scripture inside out, so you can hardly say that I've thrown it out.

 

[Smidlee]

Adam may be more accountable, but it doesn’t change who sinned first. Interesting take with the 'both Adams' though, but it doesn't help with 'sin came into the world through one man'

I believe exactly as it stated. Sin (not sins) came into the world through one man, that's Adam. We know who sin first, Satan. The first Adam could have went to God and plead for Eve's life and sin wouldn't enter into the world. (satan would have lost) How do we know this is so? This is what the "Second Adam" did. The "First Adam" decided to do it his way without God. Satan was not after Eve he was after Adam. The same the Pharisees didn't want to stone the adulteress woman they wanted to stone Jesus.

 

[Assyrian]

I believe exactly as it stated. Sin (not sins) came into the world through one man, that's Adam. We know who sin first, Satan. The first Adam could have went to God and plead for Eve's life and sin wouldn't enter into the world.

Adam could have pleaded for her, but sin was already in the world because Eve had sinned. Not sure what good pleading (by itself) would have done either. Eve sinned which meant that the only redemption was for Christ to die for her.

(satan would have lost) How do we know this is so? This is what the "Second Adam" did. The "First Adam" decided to do it his way without God. Satan was not after Eve he was after Adam. The same the Pharisees didn't want to stone the adulteress woman they wanted to stone Jesus.

No you can't run the analogy backward from the last Adam to the first because as Paul keep reiterating in Romans 5, what Christ did was so much more than Adam. The name Jesus means 'God saves', it is only God incarnate who can redeem us from our sins, Adam couldn't. Psalm 49:7 Truly no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life.

 

[Smidlee]

Adam could have pleaded for her, but sin was already in the world because Eve had sinned. Not sure what good pleading (by itself) would have done either. Eve sinned which meant that the only redemption was for Christ to die for her.

not according to scripture. It's was Adam that bought sin into the world not Eve. Satan was the first to sin and was able to deceive Eve but after that the choice was Adam. Would he traust God or take the matter in his own hands.

No you can't run the analogy backward from the last Adam to the first because as Paul keep reiterating in Romans 5, what Christ did was so much more than Adam. The name Jesus means 'God saves', it is only God incarnate who can redeem us from our sins, Adam couldn't. Psalm 49:7 Truly no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life.

Adam sin so of course he couldn't but what about before he rebelled against God?
Of course God knew what Adam would do and plan to send Christ from the beginning.

 

[Assyrian]

not according to scripture. It's was Adam that bought sin into the world not Eve. Satan was the first to sin and was able to deceive Eve but after that the choice was Adam. Would he traust God or take the matter in his own hands.

You can't say 'not according to scripture'. That is the problem, we have two descriptions in scripture and they contradict each other. Paul say sin entered through one man, seemingly speaking of Adam, but Genesis describes Eve as the first to sin. Was Paul wrong, or was he speaking figuratively? Surely the better answer for a Christian is that Paul was speaking figuratively, as he says himself Adam is a figure of Christ Rom 5:14.

Adam sin so of course he couldn't but what about before he rebelled against God?
Of course God knew what Adam would do and plan to send Christ from the beginning.

Aren't you undervaluing the deity of Christ here if you think Adam could have done the job just as well?

 

[lucaspa]

Thats the problem when people try to "read into" or "interpret" the Bible. The Bible means exactly what it says. It's God's law and its very direct.

In this case what we have are 2 creation stories. The original texts do not have the "verses" we have now. Genesis 2:4 is the start of a second and independent creation story.

There is the scripture ONLY. The "interpretation" is just a game for people to try to get the Bible to say something that it doesn't. God's word is the same yesterday, today, tommorrow.

We MUST use interpretation because the Bible doesn't come with a glossary. So if we start at Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth", that requires interpretation. What is meant by "the beginning"? What are "the heavens"? "Elohim" in Hebrew is "gods". Plural. More than one god. Yet we interpret and translate that as "God", singular.

What is more, we view things from our present perspective. Thus you intend to interpret Genesis 1 as a historical account. BUT, if you put yourself into the place of the people of the time and take into account what they were aware of, you see that Genesis 1 was never intended as literal history. It would have been interpreted (rightly) by the people of th time as a refutation of the Babylonian pantheon. But you are not aware of the Enuma Elish, are you? They were.

So the present attempt to make Genesis 1-3 a single account and literal history is indeed an interpretation. It is also one that makes the Bible say things it doesn't.

 

[mog144]

Look at what Genesis says...

Genesis 2:1-4 (NKJV)
Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens...

It says clearly that the biblical creation account is the "history of the heavens and the earth". If the creation account is not true, then the book of Genesis is a lie.

If Genesis is a lie, then the origin of the concept of sin is also a lie, so why believe in a messiah coming to save people from sin?

I don't understand why anyone who doesn't believe the biblical account of creation would want to be a christian.

If you don't believe the biblical account of creation, what do you believe, why, and how is it logical to believe as you do?

In a nutshell, the reason that God returns @ "Second Advent" is so that He is renowned. Daniel tells us this, if the entire world is destroyed then who is He renowned to? He comes to restore the knowledge of Himself among His people. Hosea 4:1 says that there is no truth nor is there any knowledge of God found in the land. Revelation says that the Everlasting Gospel comes to earth in the last-day, this said, which bread have you been feasting on until now? The world is confused about everything, you people don't know which direction you are traveling. The world is turned away backward from Judgment and it's because we have turned away from Yahweh. He still waits for us to turn back toward Judgment and get it over-with. We refuse and choose to remain in the spiritual land of Egypt and Sodom.

Were God's people able to keep the Sabbath and Honor their God while they were in captivity? No!

Prophecy says that the world is held captive to the Beast in the last-day but the Beast is exposed and overthrown and taken into captivity when God steps in and restores His Authoritative Order; the Seal of GOD is His Authoritative Order and Law.

We too must be freed from our bondage before we can rightly honor Him by keeping the Sabbath day Holy. It is a lifelong Covenant for all generations of Abraham's seed. All people who claim the true God of Israel as their God are in all nations and all of the nations established in the seed of Abraham (not corrupted) will be incorruptible and satan knows that he must win you over before this day comes or else he can't stand a chance to survive and destroy innocent souls.

This said, you, jennimatts is not any different from the people you question, and this is not your fault, it's the condition of the whole world but the world doesn't know their filthy condition as this is written. It's said that we don't know that we are in transgression. The entire world falls short of Grace and this is because nobody has the understanding of the True Messiah until He Reveals Himself again in Truth and in Spirit at the Second Advent. This much should be perfectly clear in any mind if you read Daniel.

Wake up my friends!

 

[theFijian]

Marcionites, and Red-letterers sure, but they're rather fringey, though I suspect you think it is about TE that you are serving these baseless claims against, where is your basis for these accusations? For instance you'd probably say that I don't agree with Genesis 1:1-2:3 yet I know this passage of scripture inside out, so you can hardly say that I've thrown it out.

Tearing out parts of the Bible = people who don't agree with me

 

[Keachian]

Tearing out parts of the Bible = people who don't agree with me

Oh so tearing out parts of the Bible is the new heresy, gotcha

 

[theFijian]

Oh so tearing out parts of the Bible is the new heresy, gotcha

Perhaps you not gotchme, my point was a Creationist will simply accuse those who don't agree with them as tearing pages out of their bibles. But perhaps you did getchme and this is wasted bandwidth