Scripture Shows Genesis is Historical

lucaspa · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 09:55 AM fragmentsofdreams said this in Post #39

Your claim was that the author(s) of Genesis intended for it to be taken as a historical record. You have yet to support this claim.

Good point. All he has shown, even if we allow his claims about other books of the Bible (which I don't) is that these thought the stories were history, not that they were intended to be history.  Those authors could be just as mistaken as Micaiah in their interpretation.

Nathan Poe · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 09:35 AM JohnR7 said this in Post #37 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=679157#post679157)

If you can get it past the review board. Solomon we are told, wrote 1000 books and only 3 of them were approved and one almost did not make it, because he mentioned a women's breasts.

I've mentioned the "review board" before. A group of falliable humans calling themselves the "church," speaking on God's behalf, and voting on which books were "Divinely inspired" and which weren't.

Of course, if they really were speaking on God's behalf, why did they need a vote? Wouldn't it have been unanimous every time?

Song 4:5
    Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies.
 

Gotta love the Song of Solomon. And he mentions a lot more than breasts.
At least Solomon had no problems expressing his sexuality and sexual attraction, certainly not to any of his hundreds of wives and concubines. I forget the actual number he had, but I often wonder when did he ever find the time to get out of the harem, let alone be such a great and wise king?

Gooch's dad · Feb 27, 2003

The account in Genesis refers to a 'tree of life' and a 'tree of knowledge of good and evil'. If this isn't a clear indication that the story is a parable, then I'll eat my hat. C'mon, people, its allegory.

JohnR7 · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 10:09 AM Nathan Poe said this in Post #42

I've mentioned the "review board" before. A group of falliable humans calling themselves the "church," speaking on God's behalf, and voting on which books were "Divinely inspired" and which weren't.

Typical response by someone who can not get their work approved by the review board.

Of course, if they really were speaking on God's behalf, why did they need a vote? Wouldn't it have been unanimous every time?

I am going to give you a serious answer here, although you most likely will not appreciate it. Moses went on a LOT of 40 day fasts. When he went up to the top of the mountain to talk to God, he did not take any food with him.

It is hard to find men who are willing to pay the price in Holiness, Sanctification, and Consecration, for God to perfect and to use. God has found very few people over the years who were willing to pay the price to be used by Him in a great way. 

At least Solomon had no problems expressing his sexuality and sexual attraction, certainly not to any of his hundreds of wives and concubines. I forget the actual number he had, but I often wonder when did he ever find the time to get out of the harem, let alone be such a great and wise king?

He had 700 wives and 300 concubines. They caused him a lot of problems. Like my pastor says, most men can not handle one women, much less 1000 of them.

I never thought about it before. But if you figure he could sleep with maybe 5 women a week, in 52 weeks that would only be 260 women per calander year. So maybe he would get around to them once every four or five years.

Life was different back then. If a women had a roof over her head, clothing on her back and food to eat, that was enough for them. With the added bonus that if they had a son, he would be raised and educated as a prince. What more could they ask for?  

JohnR7 · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 10:43 AM Gooch's dad said this in Post #43

The account in Genesis refers to a 'tree of life' and a 'tree of knowledge of good and evil'. If this isn't a clear indication that the story is a parable, then I'll eat my hat. C'mon, people, its allegory.

Would you like some salt and pepper with that hat?

The tree of life has actual fruit. Twelve different kinds of fruit, one for every month of the year.

Rev. 22:1-2
    And he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb, [2] in the middle of its street. And on either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

 

JohnR7 · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 09:42 AM lucaspa said this in Post #38

1. There are two (well, really 3) separate creation stories that contradict. One is Genesis 1:1 to 2:4a. The second is Genesis 2:4b - Genesis 5.  The third is Genesis 5:1 thru Genesis 8.

The first is Creation the second two you mention is the GENERATIONS. This is what gets everyone mixed up and confused. They do not distinguish between creation and the generations.

Genesis 2:4
    These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

Genesis 5:1
    This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

 

Melchior · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 03:45 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #44 

He had 700 wives and 300 concubines. They caused him a lot of problems. Like my pastor says, most men can not handle one women, much less 1000 of them.

I never thought about it before. But if you figure he could sleep with maybe 5 women a week, in 52 weeks that would only be 260 women per calander year. So maybe he would get around to them once every four or five years.

Life was different back then. If a women had a roof over her head, clothing on her back and food to eat, that was enough for them. With the added bonus that if they had a son, he would be raised and educated as a prince. What more could they ask for?  

There is something truly barbaric about having 700 wives.  The law of God at that time was that the woman must remain faithful and subservient to their husband or face dire consequences and even be denied an afterlife.  Women like sex just as much as men do, and to deny them sex for 4-5 years at a time is not right.

I love stories like this in the OT because it demonstrates so clearly the aspects of God, for Solomon was a great leader of God people. And the fact that God chose and spoke through him is a sense of condoning his behavior. 

In the end, it was all these women that poisoned Solomon's mind and had him construct temples to other gods.  But the sin was not that he had 700 wives, but that he began to worship other gods, so if there is any other moral to learn, its not that having multiple wives are bad, but that listening to them is.  

Arikay · Feb 27, 2003

He does that a lot. He makes a claim then instead of providing evidence, he asks people to falsify his claim (otherwise its right) and then ignores most of the falsifacation (when people have it). You can read all about it in the grand canyon threads.

Today at 06:55 AM fragmentsofdreams said this in Post #39 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=679178#post679178)

Your claim was that the author(s) of Genesis intended for it to be taken as a historical record. You have yet to support this claim.

Nathan Poe · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 10:45 AM JohnR7 said this in Post #44 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=679250#post679250)

Typical response by someone who can not get their work approved by the review board.

I've been approved by many review boards in my time, so your little ad hominem attack doesn't apply to me.

I am going to give you a serious answer here, although you most likely will not appreciate it. Moses went on a LOT of 40 day fasts. When he went up to the top of the mountain to talk to God, he did not take any food with him.

It is hard to find men who are willing to pay the price in Holiness, Sanctification, and Consecration, for God to perfect and to use. God has found very few people over the years who were willing to pay the price to be used by Him in a great way. 

I do appreciate the answer, although I don't see the relevence. I agree, it's hard to find men (or women) willing to "pay the price in holiness, sanctification, and consecration for God to perfect and to use." By the Christian definition, I'd say only one man in history met those criteria. . .and he got crucified.

The question is, did the early members of "the church" meet these criteria? Were they holy, sanctified, and consecrated, when they started shuffling books around to create what we now know as "the Bible?"

The answer is, we don't know. We know little to nothing about who these mysterious men were, let alone if they were divinely inspired. Their vote determined what "The Word of God" would be for the rest of time. Are you so quick to place your faith in these mystery men to tell you what God did and did not say?

He had 700 wives and 300 concubines. They caused him a lot of problems. Like my pastor says, most men can not handle one women, much less 1000 of them.

That would be the fault of the men. Most of the women I know don't like being "handled."

I never thought about it before. But if you figure he could sleep with maybe 5 women a week, in 52 weeks that would only be 260 women per calander year. So maybe he would get around to them once every four or five years.

I think he could sleep with more than 5 women a week. A man with 1000 women at his disposal is probably no stranger to threesomes, foursomes, and a repetoire of carnal gymnastics worthy of the Kama Sutra.

Of course, that would leave him little time to manage a nation, but I'm sure he had no shorage of ministers and advisors to cover for him when he felt the urge...

As Mel Brooks said in History of the World, Part I, "It's good to be the King."

Life was different back then. If a women had a roof over her head, clothing on her back and food to eat, that was enough for them. With the added bonus that if they had a son, he would be raised and educated as a prince. What more could they ask for?  

Not much in a world where women were virtual slaves, uneducated, shut out of virtually every aspect of society, considered the property of first their fathers, and eventually their husbands. Where absolute faithfulness was demanded of them, under penalty of stoning.

These days, of course, most women I know want more than a roof over their head, food to eat, and the honor of being his royal highness' plaything/baby machine.

As you said, times were different then. And if God approved of Solomon then, doesn't that mean that His attitudes have changed towards this sort of thing?

fragmentsofdreams · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 09:48 AM JohnR7 said this in Post #45 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=679256#post679256)

Would you like some salt and pepper with that hat?

The tree of life has actual fruit. Twelve different kinds of fruit, one for every month of the year.

Rev. 22:1-2
    And he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb, [2] in the middle of its street. And on either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

 

Revelation is highly symbolic. If you interpret all of the imagery as literal, you are missing the point.

JohnR7 · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 02:25 PM Nathan Poe said this in Post #49 The question is, did the early members of "the church" meet these criteria? Were they holy, sanctified, and consecrated, when they started shuffling books around to create what we now know as "the Bible?"

There were quite a few in the first 30 years or so. Of course most of them has spent 3 years with Jesus. Maybe as many as 5 or 10 people, who could really be used by God. I would be surprised if you could find that many alive today right now. At the time of Noah, he and His family was all God could find. So many times in History God was doing good to find one person He could use.

I think he could sleep with more than 5 women a week.

Click to expand...

I was just going by the average. Maybe he could go though the rounds every two years or so.

Of course, that would leave him little time to manage a nation,

Click to expand...

He did a huge amount of building. He built a palace, he built the temple. He built some gardens.

Not much in a world where women were virtual slaves, uneducated, shut out of virtually every aspect of society, considered the property of first their fathers, and eventually their husbands. Where absolute faithfulness was demanded of them, under penalty of stoning.

Click to expand...

Who brainwashed you?

These days, of course, most women I know want more than a roof over their head, food to eat, and the honor of being his royal highness' plaything/baby machine.

Click to expand...

Oh, those must be the women who brain washed you. Eve was so easy to deceive and women today are no different. They buy into the serpents lies, hook, line and sinker.

There are over 6 billion people in the world today. Over 2 billion in China, over 2 billon in India. Things are beginning to improve in China. But you would still be doing good to have a income over $100 a month in either one of those countries. Can you support your family on $100 per month.

As you said, times were different then. And if God approved of Solomon then, doesn't that mean that His attitudes have changed towards this sort of thing?

Click to expand...

Solomon was a king, actually it was still against the Bible for kings to multiply wives, least they turn their heart away from God. That is exactly what happened to Solomon, but there are some who say he repented and came back to God in his old age.

But, if you want to go buy a island somewere, set yourself up as king, then you could have as many wives as you wanted, and maybe even qualify for foreign aid.

But all kidding aside, to even have a king was not God's plan at all. He wanted judges and priests. The people wanted a king and he tried to warn them, but they would not listen. So he allowed them to set up a king over them. They wanted to be like the heathen nations who had a king over them.

 

JohnR7 · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 02:54 PM fragmentsofdreams said this in Post #50

Revelation is highly symbolic. If you interpret all of the imagery as literal, you are missing the point.

Oh, really tweety? Well, sense your an expert on the book of Rev. maybe you would like to explain a little bit of it's meaning to me.

Rev. 22:14-15
    Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. [15] But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.

Are the gates symbolic gates? Is the city a symbolic city? Are the dogs and the sorcerers & the sexually immoral who are denyed access to the city, are they symbolic also?

JohnR7 · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 01:08 PM Melchior said this in Post #47 

And the fact that God chose and spoke through him is a sense of condoning his behavior.

Click to expand...

 

Click to expand...

I don't think so, God clearly tells us what He approves of and what He does not approve of. Everyone can find themselves in the Bible somewhere. It is just that far to many people will find themselves as an example of what does NOT please God.  

so if there is any other moral to learn, its not that having multiple wives are bad, but that listening to them is.  

Click to expand...

Well, Adam would not have gotten himself into the trouble that he did, if he had not listened to his wife. We need to be lead by God and not allow our family to get in the way of that, to lead us astray and influence us to do unGodly things. Job did not allow his wife to influence him. If Lot has allowed his wife to influence him, he may have ended up a pillar of salt also. Look at all the problems it has caused for Abraham to listen to his wife when she suggested that he sleep with her handmaiden Hagar.

Arikay · Feb 27, 2003

Yep, because you know women are evil. We die because its womens fault (ironically we live because of women too )

The parts in the bible about women have been used for excuses for a long time to treat them like dirt. Sounds like loving ideas to me

fragmentsofdreams · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 02:29 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #52 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=679762#post679762)

Oh, really tweety? Well, sense your an expert on the book of Rev. maybe you would like to explain a little bit of it's meaning to me.

Rev. 22:14-15
    Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. [15] But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.

Are the gates symbolic gates? Is the city a symbolic city? Are the dogs and the sorcerers & the sexually immoral who are denyed access to the city, are they symbolic also?

Yes. The city is the Universal Church. The gates represent Christ. By entering into the Church through Christ, we gain access to eternal life, but we also agree to follow His teachings. The dogs, sorcerers, etc. are those who remain outside the Church.

How can you not take the dogs as symbolic? Do you think that God has something against canines?

Micaiah · Feb 27, 2003

Yesterday at 10:42 PM lucaspa said this in Post #38 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=679166#post679166)

You know, Micaiah, I looked through the whole thread and, except for the passages referring to Adam, you didn't present any evidence from Genesis itself to indicate it should be interpreted literally.  Why not?

So, let's look at the internal evidence that Genesis should not be read literally.

1. There are two (well, really 3) separate creation stories that contradict. One is Genesis 1:1 to 2:4a. The second is Genesis 2:4b - Genesis 5.  The third is Genesis 5:1 thru Genesis 8. The contradictions are a clear indication that they are not met to be read literally, because to do so conflicts with Rules 5 and 7 of how to interpret. Call the stories A, B, and C.

Contradictions:
1. The name of God is different between A and B.  "Elohim" for A and "Yahweh" for B.
2. In A creation takes 6 days, in B (Genesis 2:4b) it happens in a single day (beyom). C does not give a time period.
3. In A the order of creation is: plants, water creatures and birds, land creatures, and then plural humans both male and female.  In B the order of creation is: no plants but apparently seeds and no rain, a human male, plants, animals and birds (no water creatures), woman. In C males and females plural together are created together.
4. The mechanism of creation is different.  In A all entities including creatures are spoken into existence -- "let there be" -- but in B all the animals and birds and the human male are formed from dust or soil. The human female is formed from the rib of the male. 
5. Entrance of death for humans.  A doesn't mention it. B is internally contradictory. Genesis 2:17 implies that eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil will cause death ("within the day") but Genesis 3:22 says Adam and Eve are kicked out of the Garden so that they will not eat the fruit of the Tree of Eternal Life and "live forever", saying that they would have died anyway without eating the fruit.  C is different.  Genesis 6:1-3 says that "heavenly beings" (not mentioned in A and B) are mating with human females. In Genesis 6:3 God decides to make people mortal and limits their lifespan to 120 years.  No mention of any fruit of any tree.
6. C says there were "giants" who were the offspring of human females and "heavenly beings".  A and B do not mention such offspring.

Names:
"Adam" and "Eve" are not words that are used only as names like "Tom" or "Sally" for us. Instead, "adam" in Hebrew means "dirt" or "earth" and "eve" means "hearth".  When the names of characters in stories are those of general characteristics, such as "Pride" or "Death" or "Sower" or "Samaritan", we know we are dealing with allegory and symbolism, not history. We have a story of Dirt and Hearth.

Numerology:
The 6 days of creation in Genesis 1 are organized into 2 three day divisions with each day having 2 major creation events.  This fits with the numerology of the time (historical context) where the numbers 2, 3, 6, and especially 7 were thought to have mystical significance.  As history, just how likely is it that there were 2 and only 2 major creation events on each day?  This is creation story is structured around the numbers, and history does not do that.  History is much messier.  Of course, creation is structured to culminate in day 7, which is the Sabbath.  Since Genesis 1 was written after Israel was a worshipping community, Genesis 1 is not history but artificially devised to give justification for observing the Sabbath.

Singing:
Although written in English as prose, all of the Torah (the original language being Hebrew) is structured to be sung and is still sung by Cantors in Jewish synagogues every Sabbath.  Some of the phrases, such as "morning and evening" in Genesis 1, repeat because they are there to give the correct meter to the song. 

Conclusion: The creation stories were not meant to be literal history  but to convey different theological messages. 

Is this the best you can do?

Lets be clear on this.

1. Are you suggesting that the peoples whose names I mentioned above were not real people.

2. Were any of the people mentioned in the book of Genesis real people. How do you decide who was and wasn't.

3. Can you give others examples of people mentioned in other parts of the Bible who were spoken of as real people ie. given names, ages, their lives described in detail, yet were not real people as you suggest.

By the way, one of the other famous people spoken of in Genesis was Abraham. Apparently he was not a real person either.

I await your responses to each of these. I've posted parts of verses to save space, but you can look them up and consider the context having been given the reference. I have only given NT references.

I heard someone say in another thread that it would be deceitful for God to give us the 'evidence' for an old earth and create a young earth. Well they are the comments we've come to expect. God doesn't deceive and that is why the Scriptures that appear to refer to real people do refer to real people.

I hope you will conclude that God intends us to regard these people as real people. Genesis is a historical record of real events and real people and should be interpreted accordingly. By adopting this mode of interpretation we see Scripture plainly teaches the universe was created by God in six days, about 6000 years ago. The theistic evolutionists interpretation of Genesis is not Scriptural. It is an attempt to marry the athiests speculative view of origins which disregards God, to the Christian teaching on Creation.

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David [are] fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon [are] fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ [are] fourteen generations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David [are] fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon [are] fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ [are] fourteen generations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mar 12:26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I [am] the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 1:55 As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 1:73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 3:34 Which was [the son] of Jacob, which was [the son] of Isaac, which was [the son] of Abraham, which was [the son] of Thara, which was [the son] of Nachor,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 13:16 And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you [yourselves] thrust out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Micaiah · Feb 27, 2003

Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 19:9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk 20:37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jhn 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jhn 8:40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jhn 8:52 Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jhn 8:53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jhn 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad.
Jhn 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jhn 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let [him] go.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 7:8 And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so [Abraham] begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac [begat] Jacob; and Jacob [begat] the twelve patriarchs.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 7:16 And were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor [the father] of Sychem.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 7:17 But when the time of the promise drew nigh, which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 7:32 [Saying], I [am] the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Act 13:26 Men [and] brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 4:9 [Cometh] this blessedness then upon the circumcision [only], or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which [he had] being [yet] uncircumcised.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 4:16 Therefore [it is] of faith, that [it might be] by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, [of] the tribe of Benjamin.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2Cr 11:22 Are they Hebrews? so [am] I. Are they Israelites? so [am] I. Are they the seed of Abraham? so [am] I.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal 3:6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal 3:9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal 3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance [be] of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 2:16 For verily he took not on [him the nature of] angels; but he took on [him] the seed of Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 6:13 For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 7:2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 7:4 Now consider how great this man [was], unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 7:5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 7:6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 7:9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hbr 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten [son],

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jam 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jam 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1Pe 3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

dnich163 · Feb 27, 2003

Yesterday at 11:32 PM Micaiah said this in Post #1

Much of the debate about the meaning of Genesis is caused by different methods of interpretation. What is the evidence from Scripture that Genesis should be interpretted as a historical record? Those who don't accept this interpretation can demonstrate from Scripture why it is not a historical record.

I think part of the problem is that people try to manipulate the word of God to suit themselves. 

The word of God is the ultimate authority for the Christian. The best way of assessing how a passage should be interpreted is to observe how it interpreted elsewhere in Scripture. For this reason, this thread is confined to the internal evidence for the case.

It is often ignored that Jesus never spoke about how the world began, how our ancestors "grew up/changed/evolved" or whatever word we care to use.

By historical I mean the author intented the reader interpret the record as factual statements about past events. For example when the author asserts that a phase of creation took one day, or there was a world wide flood, or Adam and Eve were the first man and woman, then this is how the author intended for these verses to be interpreted. This is the plain meaning of the text.

The author could not use anything other than a human term to explain the time. This is part of the whole Genesis issue that human terminology has to be used to explain what is essentially a mystery about which we have no words of explanation.

How can we explain God?

This is the answer that Thomas Aquinas came to; that all he had written was "as straw" in comparison to his encounter with the living God; this mystery that is beyond all explanation or human descriptive words.

The one thing that I suggest we can be sure of in the way we picture God is that we are wrong.

 

David

Nathan Poe · Feb 27, 2003

Today at 03:23 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #51

There were quite a few in the first 30 years or so. Of course most of them has spent 3 years with Jesus. Maybe as many as 5 or 10 people, who could really be used by God. I would be surprised if you could find that many alive today right now. At the time of Noah, he and His family was all God could find. So many times in History God was doing good to find one person He could use.

If only the Bible were compiled in "the first 30 years or so," you might have had a valid point here. But as I understand it, how could there be one Bible when the very meaning of "Christianity" was up for debate? The early church didn't get its facts straight until the Council of Nicaea. It was the Nicene Creed which unified the Church in theory and in practice. That didn't happen until 325 AD.

I doubt anyone at that council had met Christ personally.

I was just going by the average. Maybe he could go though the rounds every two years or so.

A man with 1000 women at his beck and call would hardly do anything "average."

He did a huge amount of building. He built a palace, he built the temple. He built some gardens.

In all fairness, I doubt he did much of the building personally. More likely he ordered these things built. That's what being a King is all about. Well, that and the 1000 women...

Who brainwashed you?

Anyone with even a basic knowledge of history can tell you that women have been second-class citizens in just about every ancient civilization, and more than a few modern ones. Are you saying that information is mistaken, or that women in ancient times should have been happy with their lot in life? 

Oh, those must be the women who brain washed you. Eve was so easy to deceive and women today are no different. They buy into the serpents lies, hook, line and sinker.

(side note: After the serpent tricked Eve, Eve tricked Adam. So who was the bigger fool?)

Have you ever read the Malleus Maleficarum? It was the Church-sanctioned handbook for inquisitors on how to detect, torture, and execute witches, heretics, and other undesirables.

Anyway, its tone echoes yours about how women are gullible and inferior and more vulnerable to Satan, which is why there are mostly female witches. You'd like it; it was written in 1484. With the Malleus by your side, you will be able to march proudly into the sixteenth century.

There are over 6 billion people in the world today. Over 2 billion in China, over 2 billon in India. Things are beginning to improve in China. But you would still be doing good to have a income over $100 a month in either one of those countries. Can you support your family on $100 per month.

Can you explain what this has to do with anything?

Solomon was a king, actually it was still against the Bible for kings to multiply wives, least they turn their heart away from God. That is exactly what happened to Solomon, but there are some who say he repented and came back to God in his old age.

"There are some who say" the moon is made of green cheese. I hope you know better than to listen to "some who say."

But, if you want to go buy a island somewere, set yourself up as king, then you could have as many wives as you wanted, and maybe even qualify for foreign aid.

Funny, I always thought Solomon was famous for his wisdom. A man with 700 wives seems to have great difficulty making up his mind. 

But all kidding aside, to even have a king was not God's plan at all. He wanted judges and priests. The people wanted a king and he tried to warn them, but they would not listen. So he allowed them to set up a king over them. They wanted to be like the heathen nations who had a king over them. 

Did the Holy Spirit tell you this or are you putting words into God's mouth again?

lucaspa · Feb 28, 2003

Yesterday at 06:25 PM Micaiah said this in Post #56

Is this the best you can do?

It must be pretty good because you didn't answer any of it.  The ostrich strategy won't work.   I gave the data that indicates that the 3 creation stories should not be read as literal.  Why is that evidence wrong?

Lets be clear on this.

1. Are you suggesting that the peoples whose names I mentioned above were not real people.

Yes, I am suggesting that you have no evidence that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob were real.  That the Bible mentions them is in no way a guarantee that they were real.

2. Were any of the people mentioned in the book of Genesis real people. How do you decide who was and wasn't.

By the methods we employ in history to decide if any people mentioned in texts is real. For instance, was Hercules real?  He is mentioned as real in several Greek texts. How about Achilles, Ajax, Helen, Hector, Priam?  If you can get independent confirmation from other texts of the time then you approach confidence that the person was a real person.

3. Can you give others examples of people mentioned in other parts of the Bible who were spoken of as real people ie. given names, ages, their lives described in detail, yet were not real people as you suggest.

Noah. Gideon, Lot, Goliath, Daniel, Esther, the man with the prodigal child. As I said, Hercules has his life described in detail, yet you do not consider him to be real.  The same applies to Gilgamesh, doesn't it? Do you consider Gilgamesh to have been real?  He is a prime actor in Babylonian theology -- talked to the gods even.  What's your view of him?

Consistency, Micaiah, consistency.  I respect that you believe these people were real, but you cannot state it as objective fact.

By the way, one of the other famous people spoken of in Genesis was Abraham. Apparently he was not a real person either. 

How do you know he was? That is the question. You are assuming that Abraham was real because of your belief in the Bible.  But where is the independent evidence of Abraham's existence.  Supposedly Abraham became a very important man in Egypt, even getting his wife Sarah to marry Pharoah.  Any mention of this scandal in Egyptian records?  If you had that, it would go a long way to establishing the historicity of Abraham.

I heard someone say in another thread that it would be deceitful for God to give us the 'evidence' for an old earth and create a young earth. Well they are the comments we've come to expect. God doesn't deceive and that is why the Scriptures that appear to refer to real people do refer to real people.

The comments about a deceiver God come originally from an evangelical Christian minister named Charles Kingsley.  In 1857 a book called Oomphalos was written by Paul Gosse.  It was a counter to an early work on evolution entitled Vestiges of Creation where the argument that God made the earth only look old. That way all the evidence for an old earth could be dismissed. Kingsley in a private message (he and Gosse were friends and Gosse had asked Kingsley for a preface to Oomphalos) said:
"Shall I tell you the truth?  It is best.  Your book is the first that ever made me doubt the doctrine of absolute creation, and I fear it will make hundreds do so.  Your book tends to prove this - that if we accept the fact of absolute creation, God becomes God-the-Sometime-Deceiver.  I do not mean merely in the case of fossils which pretend to be the bones of dead animals; but in ...your newly created Adam's navel, you make God tell a lie.  It is not my reason, but my conscience which revolts here ... I cannot ...believe that God has written on the rocks one enormous and superfluous lie for all mankind.  To this painful dilemma you have brought me, and will, I fear, bring hundreds.  It will not make me throw away my Bible.  I trust and hope. I know in whom I have believed, and can trust Him to bring my faith safe through this puzzle, as He has through others; but for the young I do fear.  I would not for a thousand pounds put your book into my children's hands."

I hope you will conclude that God intends us to regard these people as real people. Genesis is a historical record of real events and real people and should be interpreted accordingly. By adopting this mode of interpretation we see Scripture plainly teaches the universe was created by God in six days, about 6000 years ago.

The entire Bible is a theological document whose intent is to tell people about Yahweh and the relationship of people to Yahweh and how Yahweh wants people to relate to each other.  While the books dealing with the Kingdom of Israel have history in them, they too are theological documents -- showing how the will of Yahweh is worked out in history.  The creation stories in Genesis are emphatically not historical (otherwise they wouldn't contradict) and are intended to explain the who and why of creation. Not the how.  God left the how in His Creation.

Once again, your mode of interpretation is bibliolatry. It is worship of the Bible and yourself, not worship of God.  If you wish to go down this apostate pathway, that is your choice.  But I won't walk it with you.

The theistic evolutionists interpretation of Genesis is not Scriptural. It is an attempt to marry the athiests speculative view of origins which disregards God, to the Christian teaching on Creation.

No matter how many times we tell you, you simply refuse to accept it: the refutation of a literal interpretation of Genesis and the substitution of mainstream geology, astronomy, and biology theories came from Christians.  Not an atheist in the bunch. Not even Darwin.  What you have is NOT, NOT, NOT (do you understand "not"?) Christian teaching.  It is your teaching, but not Christian.  Theistic evolution is Christian teaching.  It is the only one that provides unity between the two (you do understand the number "two", right?) books of God.

I suspect that, in the end, you will not change your mind.  That is OK. I don't care if you do.  But I do care that you not make these untruthful statements as though they are true.  If you want to state them as "I believe that a literal interpretation of the Bible is Christian teaching" then you are fine.  But you don't state the qualifier of "believe".  As long as you bear false witness, it is my duty to correct that.

Scripture Shows Genesis is Historical

Legend

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

HI

Well-Known Member

Critical loyalist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

HI

Critical loyalist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

dnich163

Well-Known Member

Legend

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency