Taking the Bible literally is correct, but not the current reading.

[John Bannister]

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

So starts the King James translation of the Bible. A description of a void, in which nothing exists except God. This description uses 'earth' to mean everything. This is clear, as this is not a description of Earth, and in fact clearly states that it is a time before. Modern science tells us that before everything there was nothing. The Bible tells us that before everything there was nothing, except God, whose spirit moved about the void. A shapeless void of eternal darkness, likened to water.

3 And God said, Let there be light, and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Here describes the first step in the process; God creates light. The text is clear from now to separate the stages of the creation into segments of time, equalling seven distinct eras in total. The significance of the number 7 was noted in other Near East cultures, being used in the calendars of the Babylonians, and the Kurdish people. The seven day week is used by all cultures descended from the teachings of Abraham, and of Zoroasta.
Despite insistence of the literal interpretation of "days" by many, I believe this is missing the point. It is viewing the words individually instead of considering the wider context of the work. There is no specific reason that the creation should be 6 days, only that it is presented as 6 separate periods of time, or eras, which were presented as days in some way.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

In the second 'day' it describes the 'waters' being separated in the void. The new created realm is called Heaven. So by the end of the second era of Creation, what exists is a shapeless void resembling water, which has been separated, and contains light and darkness.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

Here it describes the 'waters' of the void coming together to form the earth, with seas on it. The dry land brings forth vegetation.
The official narrative presented by Christians is that this describes a water dome being created over the earth. This was also the stated belief of most near eastern cultures at the time of the writing of Genesis, who simply speculated based on the observable reality of living on a flat plane, without imagining the idea in 3D.
The official narrative of mainstream science is that the earth formed from the coming together of dust in orbit around the Sun. Once the Earth had formed, the oceans were able to form on top, and from there life was able to spring. Grass specifically was likely not around before 50 million years ago, but plants were the first visible life on Earth.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

The creation of the universe is seemingly presented here as happening once the Earth had already been made and placed in the void. This could be a literal claim, as many young earth creationists have long argued, but it could be to suggest that Earth has a special status and was designed before the universe was conceived. It could also be the case that the order of days was moved at some point in the past.
At the end of the forth day the Earth is at it was at the end of the third, but now attention is focused on the content of the sky, stating that celestial objects are for signs and timekeeping. The ability to keep accurate maps of the stars from a geocentric perspective has been a trait of major civilisations from Egypt, to China, to Peru, and was the primary method of navigation and timekeeping for most of human history.

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

On the fifth day we return to the Earth, with plants, and then from the oceans springs animal life. Great whales (to be understood as not distinct from large fish in Hebrew). The first things out on the land are the fowl and feathered things.
The scientific consensus is that after plants populated the earth and oxidised the atmosphere, that animal life began in the oceans, and stayed there for an era. The most famous animal population group to emerge once animals made the transition to land were the dinosaurs, which while presented as slow lizards since the 19th century (when perspectives were deliberate shifted), were originally known to be birds, and are now proven beyond doubt to have been types of birds. They were fully recognisable as birds by the middle of the Triassic, and these feathered fowl dominated the earth for over 100 million years.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

In the sixth epoch everything is rolling. The Earth becomes dominated with many diverse forms of life.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

So arrives the Tribe of Adam, somewhere in the Fertile Crescent, according to both the book and the fossil record. The development of intelligence is given to the consumption of fruit which was spotted because of the long battle between very early humans and snakes driving human (and especially women's) eyesight. It then goes over a few psychological truths that were not that well articulated again until recent history.
Jordan Peterson very well explains Adam and Eve. I disagree with his conclusion that it was written by a society of human geniuses, but he correctly saw the story as it was delivered to Moses by God. Watch his lectures on the Bible for a profound insight.
From there Cain moves east, and his culture (Denisova Homilis) invents technology.

Genesis is attributed to Moses staring into an Acacia bush and being contacted by God. It seems to describe space and the coming together of the Earth, as best as Moses could, having no idea what he saw.
The Acacia bush is full of DMT, a powerful psychedelic, which is also an endogenous chemical found in the lungs and brain of mammals. The psychedelic state put Moses in contact with the Alpha and Omega, who proved himself by showing the universe from the beginning to a man who had only ever known the ancient Egyptian world.
This information has been illegal for 2000 years, but do not take the Lord's name in vain.

Exodus describes a new pharaoh who was not from the tribe of Joseph, taking over Egypt. This new pharaoh decided that the population was too large, so he set about creating a rat race economy. The people of Egypt were suppressed under the weight of work and competition, forced to rush to build new treasure cities. Once they were fully under the thumb of this system, Pharaoh pressured and then eventually mandated midwives to start killing the babies born to the working classes.

Why is there no evidence of mass slavery in Egypt, and why is there no evidence of Jews in Egypt?
They were not aware that they were slaves, the same as people today. The children of Israel followed Moses out of Egypt, not some specific ethnic group. All who believe are saved, and those who follow the spirit of Israel, the person, not the modern nation state.
The suggestions of an ethnic group specially set aside are made by the Pharisees, and them alone, who work by the Talmud, which gives them license to disobey their own laws. Jesus freed the information from their control and condemned their elitism.

It is written in the book, once you abandon the accepted 'literal' reading and read it as eye witness accounts written by men, who were speaking literally in the best way they could, given the baffling situations they found themselves.

As in everything, this is false dichotomy based on distrust. The correct answer is, as Jesus said, the third way.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I don't see how this counts as Physical & Life Sciences.

 

[John Bannister]

The only other section I could spot where it might go is Christians only. Where should this thread go?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The only other section I could spot where it might go is Christians only

It might have been better off there because I do see no reason why this counts as Physical and/or Life Sciences.

Like... it's not even scientific. It's just you saying 'The Bible says this' and... that's it.

 

[John Bannister]

I'll put it there and see if anyone actually understand the message. I'm sorry it might rely on being scientifically literate to a degree above normal

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'll put it there and see if anyone actually understand the message

Might be best.

And since you're new: do remember to use the reply/quote functions. It makes it so much easier to respond to someone.

 

[John Bannister]

I'm encountering this sad situation where the message is rejected on the merit of it being a message about God, or rejected on the merit of it being a message containing the scientific narrative of the world.

Nobody from either side will look at this. It is so frustrating

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'm encountering this sad situation where the message is rejected on the merit of it being a message about God, or rejected on the merit of it being a message containing the scientific narrative of the world.

Nobody from either side will look at this. It is so frustrating

Again: I do not see anything scientific in your message. It's just you giving an interpretation of your reading of the Bible.

 

[John Bannister]

Again: I do not see anything scientific in your message. It's just you giving an interpretation of your reading of the Bible.

The thing which is scientific is adhering to the scientific understanding of the world, and seeing that the scientific understanding of the world lines up with the Bible when you read the Bible as it is, instead of inserting strange religious dogma on top of it.
That's why the people who believe in insanity like young earth creationism refuse to look at it.

Young Earth Creationists especially are holding a book which contains the history of mankind, obscured inside a religion, and the tools they need to use to understand that; they believe are 100% fabrications from the devil.

Christian Scientists aren't looking into Noah's flood, because they deny when it was, holding to the fact that the Pharisees suggest 4500bc. All evidence points to 12,600bc when a comet hit the north American ice cap and raised the sea level 100+ metres in a very short time.
Noah never makes mention of the entire earth being totally encased in water and reformed in a new image after a giant dome above the earth is torn open. He never makes a claim to collecting every single animal on earth, simply stating to grab everything from his local environment. He never makes the claim to be the only family alive on earth, in fact encountering other people after landing in Armenia (The book says this). The science says the north western coast of the Black Sea was pushed back by dozens of miles, submerging a vast area of land underwater at the end of the ice age, which can be seen today in satellite photos along with most areas submerged at the end of the ice age.
Noah says in the book that the water rose 15 cubits above where he lived, based on the 'mountains' in his area being that high. That's not very high; a lowland area.
The Book says that Noah was in a lowland area which was wiped out by a flood, spent 150 days floating in open ocean, and then landed in Armenia.... It says where he was; he was somewhere on the Black Sea in the area which was not underwater during the last ice age, and he got swept on his boat down to the south coast where he disembarked.

The biblical story does not match the story that Christians tell about the story. It only can if you make giant leaps that make no sense, like insisting that the Bible says the water rose to 15 cubits above the summit of Everest, which it does not.

What's scientific is the scientific consensus about the world, which is reflected in the Bible by removing the religious stories that obscure it.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The thing which is scientific is adhering to the scientific understanding of the world, and seeing that the scientific understanding of the world lines up with the Bible when you read the Bible as it is, instead of inserting strange religious dogma on top of it.
That's why the people who believe in insanity like young earth creationism refuse to look at it.

Young Earth Creationists especially are holding a book which contains the history of mankind, obscured inside a religion, and the tools they need to use to understand that; they believe are 100% fabrications from the devil.

Christian Scientists aren't looking into Noah's flood, because they deny when it was, holding to the fact that the Pharisees suggest 4500bc. All evidence points to 12,600bc when a comet hit the north American ice cap and raised the sea level 100+ metres in a very short time.
Noah never makes mention of the entire earth being totally encased in water and reformed in a new image after a giant dome above the earth is torn open. He never makes a claim to collecting every single animal on earth, simply stating to grab everything from his local environment. He never makes the claim to be the only family alive on earth, in fact encountering other people after landing in Armenia (The book says this). The science says the north western coast of the Black Sea was pushed back by dozens of miles, submerging a vast area of land underwater at the end of the ice age, which can be seen today in satellite photos along with most areas submerged at the end of the ice age.
Noah says in the book that the water rose 15 cubits above where he lived, based on the 'mountains' in his area being that high. That's not very high; a lowland area.
The Book says that Noah was in a lowland area which was wiped out by a flood, spent 150 days floating in open ocean, and then landed in Armenia.... It says where he was; he was somewhere on the Black Sea in the area which was not underwater during the last ice age, and he got swept on his boat down to the south coast where he disembarked.

The biblical story does not match the story that Christians tell about the story. It only can if you make giant leaps that make no sense, like insisting that the Bible says the water rose to 15 cubits above the summit of Everest, which it does not.

What's scientific is the scientific consensus about the world, which is reflected in the Bible by removing the religious stories that obscure it.

Again, that's just your interpretation of the Bible.

I do have to ask: what is wrong with reading at the Bible and realizing that a lot of the stuff from the Old Testament is not grounded in reality or fact?

 

[John Bannister]

Again, that's just your interpretation of the Bible.

I do have to ask: what is wrong with reading at the Bible and realizing that a lot of the stuff from the Old Testament is not grounded in reality or fact?

Because that's wrong. The Bible is a history of the world written by the people who experienced it. It's only wrong if you force interpretation based on adherence to god on earth instead of He that lives in Heaven.

Read it, and work out what it says. Don't accept what some other human has told you it says.

I thought it was stupid for a long time too, because I too decided to accept the official reading of the Bible and present that as correct. The "Literal" interpretation which takes the language and twists it into new meanings.
Yes that is my reading, and that's what it says when you disregard the accepted official narrative and just read the words that are there.
Where in the story of Noah does it say the entire earth was encased in water up to the height of Everest? Where does it say he scoured the earth in search of an example of every species? Where does it say his family are the only survivors? Where does it say that? It doesn't. It simply, obviously, self-evidently doesn't.
The official Christian narrative of what the Bible says is wrong. It's completely insane.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Because that's wrong. The Bible is a history of the world written by the people who experienced it. It's only wrong if you force interpretation based on adherence to a God on earth instead of He that lives in Heaven

I thought it was stupid for a long time too, because I too decided to accept the official reading of the Bible and present that as correct. The "Literal" interpretation which takes the language and twists it into new meanings.
Yes that is my reading, and that's what it says when you disregard the accepted official narrative and just read the words that are there.
Where in the story of Noah does it say the entire earth was encased in water up to the height of Everest? Where does it say he scoured the earth in search of an example of every species? Where does it say his family are the only survivors? Where does it say that? It doesn't. It simply, obviously, self-evidently doesn't.
The official Christian narrative of what the Bible says is wrong. It's completely insane.

Except it's not a history of the world. It's a history of the world that was known to the people of the Middle East who became the groups we know as the Israelites, but that is not the same as the entire world. Where is the mention of the Americas? Or Australasia? Where's China, Japan, Russia, Mongolia, Sudan, Europe? THAT's the world, not a single area of the world.

The Bible is an explanation of the world as was known in the Bronze Age period to those inhabiting the Middle East and Near Middle East.

And the entire story of Noah and the Flood in Genesis answers your questions.

And if you REALLY think that an unknown user on the internet is going to overturn hundreds of years of Christian doctrine... more power to you, but I don't se it happening at all.

 

[Neogaia777]

@John Bannister

Well, I am interested in this, so I'm watching the thread, but will probably have to reply to it tomorrow, as I'm going to bed right now, etc...

You seem to have some ideas that are similar to mine, so don't give up on this, and wherever it gets moved to, if it does, I'll check back in on it and you tomorrow, ok...

God Bless!

 

[John Bannister]

Except it's not a history of the world. It's a history of the world that was known to the people of the Middle East who became the groups we know as the Israelites, but that is not the same as the entire world. Where is the mention of the Americas? Or Australasia? Where's China, Japan, Russia, Mongolia, Sudan, Europe? THAT's the world, not a single area of the world.

That's irrelevant. A banana doesn't cease to be a fruit because oranges exist.

And the entire story of Noah and the Flood in Genesis answers your questions.

Quote it then. If your Bible is not the same as the one on my table in front of me.

And if you REALLY think that an unknown user on the internet is going to overturn hundreds of years of Christian doctrine... more power to you, but I don't se it happening at all.

An unknown man in Nazareth overturned everything, and his memory was turned into a cult to hide what he did. Maybe you're right and nobody will ever listen to me, but I'm going to turn the paperwork off the tables and look at what is going on without the surrounding literature that forces a provably wrong narrative. I follow Jesus

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That's irrelevant. A banana doesn't cease to be a fruit because oranges exist.

It is relevant. You say the Bible is the history of the world. Where in the Bible does it talk about China, Russia, Europe, Africa, Australia and the Americas?

Quote it then. If your Bible is not the same as the one on my table in front of me.

Where in the story of Noah does it say the entire earth was encased in water up to the height of Everest?

Genesis 7:17 - 19 = 17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered.

Where does it say he scoured the earth in search of an example of every species?

Genesis 7: 6 - 9 = 6 Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters came on the earth. 7 And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood. 8 Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, 9 male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah.

Where does it say his family are the only survivors?

Genesis 7: 21 - 23 = 21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

An unknown man in Nazareth overturned everything, and his memory was turned into a cult to hide what he did. Maybe you're right and nobody will ever listen to me, but I'm going to turn the paperwork off the tables and look at what is going on without the surrounding literature that forces a provably wrong narrative. I follow Jesus

Except that you are in no position to say that the narrative is wrong. You are not a Biblical scholar, nor a priest or cardinal or bishop or pope or prophet.

 

[John Bannister]

It is relevant. You say the Bible is the history of the world. Where in the Bible does it talk about China, Russia, Europe, Africa, Australia and the Americas?

Genesis 7:17 - 19 = 17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered.

Genesis 7: 6 - 9 = 6 Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters came on the earth. 7 And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood. 8 Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, 9 male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah.

Genesis 7: 21 - 23 = 21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

Why do you assume that Noah is speaking of the entire earth, and not his local environment? The Bible is 'not a history of the world' because it does not tell the history of the whole Earth, yet you insist that the Bible speaks of the whole earth when talking about the land where Noah lives. Consider this deeply.

Except that you are in no position to say that the narrative is wrong. You are not a Biblical scholar, nor a priest or cardinal or bishop or pope or prophet.

Well, first of all you don't know that so it was a risky assumption. More pressingly though; Why are you so concerned about rank and position? Do you hold a rank that can be used for control over another on earth, or do you submit your final authority to another man?

I follow the Bible, telling me I am not authorised to speak about God won't make me shut up.

 

[SelfSim]

This thread really needs to be moved out of this forum.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This is sophistry attempting to use a single word to completely shift the entire context of what was said, and I won't play your game.

No, it's a valid point. You say the Bible is a history of the world, but I say that since the Bible doesn't mention anywhere else in the world, only the region of the Middle East and Near Middle East, it can only be a history of the world known to the writers of the Bible at the time, which was their immediate location.

Why do you assume that Noah is speaking of the entire earth, and not his local environment? The Bible is 'not a history of the world' because it does not tell the history of the whole Earth, yet you insist that the Bible speaks of the whole earth when talking about the land where Noah lives. Consider this deeply.

So the Bible should be taken literally, but only when you don't want it to. That's just faulty logic. The Bible is either literal or it is not. It can't be in between.

But either way, I answered your questions and showed you that the Bible does say, if we take it as a literal reading, the Flood covered the entire world, Noah had two of every animal on the Ark, and he and his family were the only survivors of the Flood. That is the take away from a literal reading of the Bible.

OR it could all be allegorical and just be a story.

Well, first of all you don't know that so it was a risky assumption. More pressingly though; Why are you so concerned about rank and position? Do you hold a rank that can be used for control over another on earth, or do you submit your final authority to another man?

I follow the Bible, telling me I am not authorised to speak about God won't make me shut up.

Oh I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it. I'm just saying that you're an unknown user on a website that has very little important and is only one of several hundred or thousand others like it. You're not going to overturn centuries of Christian doctrine, no matter how hard you try.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This thread really needs to be moved out of this forum.

I think that if he reports his main post, he can ask for it to be moved to another thread.

ETA: I will add that I THINK that it can be done that way, since you can ask for your threads to be shut down the same way.

 

[John Bannister]

No, it's a valid point. You say the Bible is a history of the world, but I say that since the Bible doesn't mention anywhere else in the world, only the region of the Middle East and Near Middle East, it can only be a history of the world known to the writers of the Bible at the time, which was their immediate location.



So the Bible should be taken literally, but only when you don't want it to. That's just faulty logic. The Bible is either literal or it is not. It can't be in between.

But either way, I answered your questions and showed you that the Bible does say, if we take it as a literal reading, the Flood covered the entire world, Noah had two of every animal on the Ark, and he and his family were the only survivors of the Flood. That is the take away from a literal reading of the Bible.

OR it could all be allegorical and just be a story.



Oh I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it. I'm just saying that you're an unknown user on a website that has very little important and is only one of several hundred or thousand others like it. You're not going to overturn centuries of Christian doctrine, no matter how hard you try.

I apologise for the sophistry comment. I hoped to delete it before it was read because it struck me as dismissive rather than a reply from the Spirit.

My point is that the Bible is a library of books written by human beings from their own perspective. Yes it is literal, but no it is not. At once. If you see your whole world destroyed, and that is all you know, what would you describe as happened?
You must research, and see the history as it is evident on the world, and see the authors of the Bible as their small parts in this grand story.

I must make clear when I say the Bible is the history of the world, I am not saying it is The history of the world, and neither am I denying the authors and their limited perspective. The authors and their limited perspectives are the key to understanding what is being said.

There must be a separation from the 'literal' interpretation which assumes the book is written from the perspective of God, or that the book was literally written by God. There is a difference between what the book literally says; the words of the authors in their perspectives, and what it 'literally says' when it is misattributed as a divine document free of error, bias, or the author's own perspectives.

We have few disagreement, except in giving deference to the interpretation pushed by the organised churches, which is an obscuring factor for the individual who should seek the truth alone.