If the beginnings of Genesis aren't literally true, then what way are they true?

[Loudmouth]

Scientists fit evidence to ideas all the time.

Examples?

 

[Loudmouth]

I agree religion shouldn't be taught in schools. I also agree evolution theory shouldn't be taught in schools.

Why shouldn't science be taught in schools?

 

[paulm50]

Scientists fit evidence to ideas all the time.

Hypothesis --> Evidence fitted --> Theory.

Bible --> Evidence fitted --> Truth.

Link to where the proof is.

I also agree evolution theory shouldn't be taught in schools.

Why shouldn't the most highly held and accepted view of why we are here be taught? Other than to hide the idea away?

That explains why religious truth is held by the minority.

No one religion is held by the majority of people. Religion has been around long before the Hebrews decided to have a version of their own.

I understand your statement, but you don't understand those two books.

You failed to answer his statement. A minority of people believe the creationist theory. Get out of America to see. Maybe that's why you want it to be banned from teaching.

Creationists have been successfully defending their beliefs for over 2000 years. That's why they are still here.

The number are getting smaller by the day. Actually Creationists go back further than 2,000 years.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Why does it take so long to understand it, is it long?

Because the subject is so immense. You are talking about the God that created the universe. If you knew all the knowledge in a university library you would still only just be starting to understand.

 

[paulm50]

Around 4,000 BC according the Christians the Earth was created and it all starts there. The biggest flaw in that debate is;

Oldest buildings in the world.

10 Oldest Buildings In The World.

Oldest civilization in the world.

While tribe of very insignificant, in the order of the things at the time, were herding their goats and sheep. And before the world was meant to be here. Others were creating civilisation, huge buildings and science. They didn't just learn all this over night it took years. They all had their own religion. Separate from Judaism and very different.

2667 the Egyptians were building huge pyramids. Not with the help of Jews, the evidence is clear it was Egyptians doing is as an act of Faith. They were working when they weren't needed in the fields, well cared for, housed and fed.

So at the time of this tribe of goat herders, others were far ahead of them. The Goat herders had all the knowledge and wer god's chosen people. Touch of inferiority complex there. Truth is in the scheme of things, god's chsen people were being kicked around by others at will. All they could manage was to slaughter the Canaanite and take their land.

Some will tell us to stop thinking, learning, discovering and refuse to answer direct questions. Like what happened to dinosaurs, Mega Fauna, Neanderthals, Cave Drawings, layers in the earth showing we came millions of years later, fossils, religion was here long before the Hebrews, etc. The link shows one still being practised. There were religions before that.

This show what happens when children aren't taught properly. Saying fossils tell us little, there isn't 500,000 layers in the Earth, and the dinosaurs were here at the same time. Religion is a widely held belief, as if it justifies their one take on it. The best one will always be, stop using your brain to understand the truth.

And because some insist on keeping some in ignorance, we must challenge them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Scientists fit evidence to ideas all the time.

Hypothesis --> Evidence fitted --> Theory.

Bible --> Evidence fitted --> Truth.

No, in science one first makes a hypothesis then it is tested with evidence. If the evidence says "no" the hypothesis is refuted in its present form. It may then be corrected or dropped. After a hypothesis is tested many times and is tested by the scientific community as a whole it becomes a theory. The theory may still be changed as more evidence comes in, but it is always wrong to fit the evidence to the theory.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I agree religion shouldn't be taught in schools. I also agree evolution theory shouldn't be taught in schools.

But that is where you are wrong. Evolution is based upon evidence. There are tons of scientific evidence that supports evolution, and there is none for creationism. That is why your side keeps losing court cases.

That explains why religious truth is held by the minority.

Then according to your logic atheism is more correct than Christianity since it is an extremely small minority.

I understand your statement, but you don't understand those two books.

I probably understand those books better than you do You are working from a disadvantage.

Creationists have been successfully defending their beliefs for over 2000 years. That's why they are still here.

No, they are still here because they are incredibly afraid to admit that they are right.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Here's an assignment for you. Line the four gospels up and do a simple timeline of events. You may be surprised how many discrepancies there really are.

Yep I am surprised because there are none. Matthew and John traveled with Jesus so of course they learned the most. Mark was Mary's son. The Mary that owned the upper room where the disciples stayed when they were in Jerusalem. Then there was Luke a friend of Paul. He never even knew Jesus only he talks about the diligent inquiry he made. Even it is obvious that Luke talked extensively with Mary to find out some of the stories she told about Jesus as He was growing up. Mary raised Jesus together with James. The youngest son of Joseph from a previous marriage.

 

[HitchSlap]

Yep I am surprised because there are none. Matthew and John traveled with Jesus so of course they learned the most. Mark was Mary's son. The marry that owned the upper room where the disciples stayed when they were in Jerusalem. Then there was Luke a friend of Paul. He never even knew Jesus only he talks about the diligent inquiry he made. Even it is obvious that like talked extensively to Mary to find out some of the stories she told about Jesus as He was growing up. Mary raised Jesus together with James. The youngest son of Joseph from a previous marriage.

Was Jesus born before (Matthew) or after (Luke) Herod the Great died?

 

[SkyWriting]

So those dying because of a natural event, got what they deserve. Even these victims.

"None are righteous, no not one."

Such observations are unique to the Christian scriptures.
That's why they win the coveted label of "Truth" while others
spout phoney-baloney.

 

[SkyWriting]

Here's an assignment for you. Line the four gospels up and do a simple timeline of events. You may be surprised how many discrepancies there really are.

That's odd. You'd think some editor somewhere would have noticed.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the "synoptic Gospels."
They are so called because these Gospels share a common outline of events..."

 

[HitchSlap]

That's odd. You'd think some editor somewhere would have noticed.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the "synoptic Gospels."
They are so called because these Gospels share a common outline of events..."

Someone did. The question, then, is why have you ignored it?

Maybe you'd like to take a run at this?

Was Jesus born before (Matthew) or after (Luke) Herod the Great died?

 

[Loudmouth]

That's odd. You'd think some editor somewhere would have noticed.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the "synoptic Gospels."
They are so called because these Gospels share a common outline of events..."

They steal lines directly from Mark.

"Though each gospel includes some unique material, the majority of Mark and roughly half of Matthew and Luke coincide in content, in much the same sequence, often nearly verbatim."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

When you see the same words, plagiarism is the usual conclusion.

 

[Doveaman]

Use evidence from the bible or science.

You already presented the evidence below. I just need to explain it.

Remember, my aim here is to show that the evidence can be interpreted to support a literal interpretation of Genesis 1.

OK, show how you interpret the evidence.

Dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs existed and became extinct before the Genesis creation events.

Genesis 1 is describing the re-creation of new earth life (YEC) on an old earth planet (OEC).

Man being created and missing out all the other hominids, including the ones we shared the land with.

Prehistoric man existed and became extinct before Adam was formed. Adam and his descendants are the most recent form of man.

It is likely that Adam was formed from the fossilized remains (dust) of an extinct homo sapian. Eve being formed from the bone of Adam gives support to this idea.

With birds being created and not evolving from dinosaurs.

Birds were created from the fossilized remains (dust) of extinct dinosaurs.

With Cain and Abel, being Farmers. When it was 490,000 years of more till we started farming.

Farming could have existed before Adam since prehistoric man existed before Adam.

With the first born, suddenly finding wives.

Cain had sisters and nieces he could have married when they came of age.

The Bible does not tell us exactly how soon Cain got married after he became a wanderer.

Cain needing to be marked to show other tribes what he had done, where the tribes came from.

Adam had other children who grew into tribes.

The Bible does not tell us exactly how soon Cain encountered other tribes after he became a wanderer.

Then the Ark being too small for all the species.

Many species went extinct before the flood, and many new species emerged after the flood. A lot of those new species emerged through hybrid speciation, resulting in a population explosion of new species.

 

[paulm50]

No, in science one first makes a hypothesis then it is tested with evidence. If the evidence says "no" the hypothesis is refuted in its present form. It may then be corrected or dropped. After a hypothesis is tested many times and is tested by the scientific community as a whole it becomes a theory. The theory may still be changed as more evidence comes in, but it is always wrong to fit the evidence to the theory.

In the terms of evolution. The evidence itself appeared before the hypothesis, such as dinosaur bones. Of course felt the date 4,000 bc was a bit of nonsense.

First Dinosaur Fossil Discoveries.

History of paleontology

And to why some want evolution struck from the curriculum.
Dinosaurs and the Bible

Starts off well, then descends into complete nonsense. If dinosaurs were only 6,000 years old. We wouldnt be finding fossils of them. We would be finding the actual bones and more crucially DNA would be common among the bones. The religious right would need to stop more than evolution to get the creation theory across.

This discredits the Adam and Eve story.

However in the rest of science you're spot on. The purpose of science isn't to prove a hypothesis, that would be absurd, it's to make thing work or work better. For instance, how many types of rock did Cave Men test before they found Flint worked best? LOL

 

[paulm50]

That's odd. You'd think some editor somewhere would have noticed.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the "synoptic Gospels."
They are so called because these Gospels share a common outline of events..."

Who Wrote the Gospels?

 

[paulm50]

You already presented the evidence below. I just need to explain it.

Remember, my aim here is to show that the evidence can be interpreted to support a literal interpretation of Genesis 1.

Then explain it.

Dinosaurs existed and became extinct before the Genesis creation events.

Where in Genesis does it say that?

Genesis 1 is describing the re-creation of new earth life (YEC) on an old earth planet (OEC).

Link to where it says that in Genesis please.

Prehistoric man existed and became extinct before Adam was formed. Adam and his descendants are the most recent form of man.

Link to where it says this. so I can tell you it's wrong. Our DNA goes back to long before your Adam and Eve.

It is likely that Adam was formed from the fossilized remains (dust) of an extinct homo sapian. Eve being formed from the bone of Adam gives support to this idea.
Birds were created from the fossilized remains (dust) of extinct dinosaurs.
Farming could have existed before Adam since prehistoric man existed before Adam.
Cain had sisters and nieces he could have married when they came of age.

The Bible does not tell us exactly how soon Cain got married after he became a wanderer.
Adam had other children who grew into tribes.

The Bible does not tell us exactly how soon Cain encountered other tribes after he became a wanderer.

Links please. You say a lot based on wishful thinking, and a lot of it is wrong. You have only what's written in the bible to work from.

Links please. Many species went extinct before the flood, and many new species emerged after the flood. A lot of those new species emerged through hybrid speciation, resulting in a population explosion of new species.

What species emerged in the last 5,000 years? As for before, yes species were becoming extinct for millions of years before the Ice Sheet melted and caused the Black Sea to flood. With Göbekli Tepe being so close to the region and closer in time to the flood, it's likely the story started there and spread. No worldwide flood as the bible describes. No great extinction either. Unless your god hid all the evidence and as a joke buried all the fossils on the 8th day.

 

[SkyWriting]

Who Wrote the Gospels?

They were all written by different people at different times and nobody noticed the
stories didn't match up. Or, they were written by committees or teams who didn't
notice that the accounts didn't match. Or, They were all written by one person,
who didn't think to make them match up. Or, the stories came from different
people and they were all different, but somebody forced them to leave them
just as is.

Or, they are different accounts, by different people, all telling different viewpoints
of the same exact events.

 

[SkyWriting]

Someone did. The question, then, is why have you ignored it?
Maybe you'd like to take a run at this?Was Jesus born before (Matthew) or after (Luke) Herod the Great died?

Sorry. I was referring to the writers not noticing a discrepancy.
It easy enough for any readers 1000's of year later, to not
know the details of history and be confused. If I tell you Jesus
was born between 4 and 6 BC....that should give you a clue that
historians are not clear on the matter.

 

[paulm50]

They were all written by different people at different times and nobody noticed the stories didn't match up. Or, they were written by committees or teams who didn't
notice that the accounts didn't match. Or, They were all written by one person,
who didn't think to make them match up. Or, the stories came from different
people and they were all different, but somebody forced them to leave them
just as is.

Or, they are different accounts, by different people, all telling different viewpoints
of the same exact events.

We know for certain. They were edited and complied by committees of people. We don't put our trust in the Genesis writers, we put our trust in a group of priests in an insignificant tribe, in exile and slavery, compiling a book to bind that tribe together. Same with the NT, we don't put our trust in the Authors, we put our trust in The Council of Nicaea. we can now see a little of what they excluded, after they burned so much.

After thought, how would we think now, if the greatest library of the time hadn't burned to the ground?

Sorry. I was referring to the writers not noticing a discrepancy.
It easy enough for any readers 1000's of year later, to not
know the details of history and be confused. If I tell you Jesus
was born between 4 and 6 BC....that should give you a clue that
historians are not clear on the matter.

Again we rely on very biased people for the date. People who had one intention when they wrote the gospels, people who had very biased intentions when they compiled the NT.

We know he wasn't born on December 25th. Was he born 1 AD? Well no. Did Herod order the killing of all the babies? No, the mass infanticide is legend. When did Herod die? No one's sure, can we use the "Star of Bethlehem"? A Saviour has to be born as predicted, or he has no validity. Even if he was born at the time of the Comet, it was 5 BC.

We now have a gap of 11 years. And everything written in the bible, about what happened in 4,000 BC, according to the biblical scholars, is 100% true. They can't even get the simple stuff right.