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

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

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.

Now that's not really a new or groundbreaking view. That's the biggest ongoing argument in Christianity to date.

And that's really all I'm going to say on the matter now since this thread really is just not meant for the sciences subforum.

 

[John Bannister]

Maybe it's not new or ground breaking, despite being apparently a baffling concept to almost all people, but we are only just discovering elements of our history which are highlighting it. There is a false dichotomy locking two opposing sides in our culture, keeping people believing the Bible is myths unrelated to real history, is the Religious dogma transplanted over the top.

There is forced choice between a rejection of science in favour of the Christian interpretation of the Bible, or the rejection of the Bible on the merit of the Christian interpretation in favour of raw science.

 

[Neogaia777]

@John Bannister

I don't know if my OP and some of my posts in the beginning of this thread would help you, but check them out if you want to...

Solution to the creation/evolution debate...?

Hope it helps...

Going to bed...

Be back later or tomorrow...

God Bless!

 

[Original Happy Camper]

realizing that a lot of the stuff from the Old Testament is not grounded in reality or fact?

That is your interpertation and or opinion which you are intitled to as is the OP

 

[Estrid]

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.

Nowhere in science is it stated, theprizedvetc that one there was " nothing "

Birds are descended from a type of dinosaurs.
Saying dinosaurs are birds is absurd.

The "slow lizard" thing is bit weird, at best its 150 plus yrs out of date

Good eyesight to avoid snakes is a weird idea.

There is zero fossil evidence for adam and eve.
If anything, its the opposite.

You may be right about some things but such carelessness
with easily researched material tends to spoil your narrative.

 

[Estrid]

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.

Nobody with a trace of scientific sophistication thinks there was
a noah- flood.

Your attribution of these strange fantasies to " science"
is your deal, there is no data to it.

 

[John Bannister]

You're addressing a Biblical narrative which I reject, so I cannot reply to you, unfortunately.

There was no flood as believed by young earth creationists, it was a 100 metre sea level rise in association with a comet hitting the north American ice cap at the end of the Ice age. Noah described the event from his perspective on the lowlands which are now under the north western part of the Black Sea. He describes 15 cubits as the height of the water as a minimum, covering 'mountains' in his immediate environment, and he describes landing near to the land of Ararat, which is an ancient Armenian kingdom (not the mountain claimed in the Christian narrative, which is not mentioned in the Bible)

 

[Estrid]

You're addressing a Biblical narrative which I reject, so I cannot reply to you, unfortunately.

There was no flood as believed by young earth creationists, it was a 100 metre sea level rise in association with a comet hitting the north American ice cap at the end of the Ice age. Noah described the event from his perspective on the lowlands which are now under the north western part of the Black Sea. He describes 15 cubits as the height of the water as a minimum, covering 'mountains' in his immediate environment, and he describes landing near to the land of Ararat, which is an ancient Armenian kingdom (not the mountain claimed in the Christian narrative, which is not mentioned in the Bible)

How about you phrase this as "in my opinion,
though all relevant evidence is contrary to it"

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[John Bannister]

Nowhere in science is it stated, theprizedvetc that one there was " nothing "

Assumedly before the pinpoint of the Big Bang, was nothing. From there first was seeded the entire universe, and over 14 billion years it spread out through the void of space, and over 14 billions years the foundations of our Earth were cooked up in suns, and spread out over the void, to come together under new suns, and so forth, and 4 billion years ago the Earth came together under the sun, with every ingredient required for life. The land grew plants, and then the oceans birthed life, and very quickly creatures became covered in feathers, and many became birdlike by the middle of the Triassic period. 60 million years ago the larger forms were wiped out, but the lineage survived as birds.
This is the scientific narrative.

Birds are descended from a type of dinosaurs.
Saying dinosaurs are birds is absurd.

Does a Tyrannosaurus at a distance not look as a Pheasant close by?
How would you describe a world dominated by feathered fowl as a specific era of ancient history, if you had never heard of a dinosaur?

The "slow lizard" thing is bit weird, at best its 150 plus yrs out of date

It has taken us 150 years to get out of it, actually, and feathers only (very reluctantly) returned to the scientific model in the last 25 years.

Good eyesight to avoid snakes is a weird idea.

The reason humans have such good eyesight is because in our far distant past, when we were tree dwelling primates, camouflaged predators, in particular snakes who are also tree-dwelling, presented a constant danger to us. By the process of natural selection, those who were better at spotting these predators survived, and those who were worse, died, and slowly the whole of the species developed keen eyesight. This, among the other myriad of things contributing to the sudden burst of human intelligence leading up to the eventual self-aware state, by opening up foraging and spotting details at a distance.
This evolutionary stress was more potent on women than men, because of the fact of infants being especially vulnerable to predators. Women even today tend towards better colour distinction in their vision.

There is zero fossil evidence for adam and eve.
If anything, its the opposite.

The parable in the story of Adam and Eve, whereby humanity coming into self-awareness is described as happening in the fertile crescent, where hominids burst in all directions only to come together again into one combined Humanity bearing the genetic records of all.

You may be right about some things but such carelessness
with easily researched material tends to spoil your narrative.

God willing I can answer your questions well if you have any.

 

[Estrid]

Assumedly before the pinpoint of the Big Bang, was nothing. From there first was seeded the entire universe, and over 14 billion years it spread out through the void of space, and over 14 billions years the foundations of our Earth were cooked up in suns, and spread out over the void, to come together under new suns, and so forth, and 4 billion years ago the Earth came together under the sun, with every ingredient required for life. The land grew plants, and then the oceans birthed life, and very quickly creatures became covered in feathers, and many became birdlike by the middle of the Triassic period. 60 million years ago the larger forms were wiped out, but the lineage survived as birds.
This is the scientific narrative.


Does a Tyrannosaurus at a distance not look as a Pheasant close by?
How would you describe a world dominated by feathered fowl as a specific era of ancient history, if you had never heard of a dinosaur?


It has taken us 150 years to get out of it, actually, and feathers only (very reluctantly) returned to the scientific model in the last 25 years.


The reason humans have such good eyesight is because in our far distant past, when we were tree dwelling primates, camouflaged predators, in particular snakes who are also tree-dwelling, presented a constant danger to us. By the process of natural selection, those who were better at spotting these predators survived, and those who were worse, died, and slowly the whole of the species developed keen eyesight. This, among the other myriad of things contributing to the sudden burst of human intelligence leading up to the eventual self-aware state, by opening up foraging and spotting details at a distance.
This evolutionary stress was more potent on women than men, because of the fact of infants being especially vulnerable to predators. Women even today tend towards better colour distinction in their vision.



The parable in the story of Adam and Eve, whereby humanity coming into self-awareness is described as happening in the fertile crescent, where hominids burst in all directions only to come together again into one combined Humanity bearing the genetic records of all.


God willing I can answer your questions well if you have any.

" Nothing" pre big bang. No. That is not any actual theory.

Your confused " science" doesnt get better after that,
sorry.
A little more study and a lil less teaching for a bit?

 

[John Bannister]

I'm sorry we can't engage in a dialogue about this. Others can read it all though and others can ask questions

 

[Valletta]

Assumedly before the pinpoint of the Big Bang, was nothing. From there first was seeded the entire universe, and over 14 billion years it spread out through the void of space, and over 14 billions years the foundations of our Earth were cooked up in suns, and spread out over the void, to come together under new suns, and so forth, and 4 billion years ago the Earth came together under the sun, with every ingredient required for life. The land grew plants, and then the oceans birthed life, and very quickly creatures became covered in feathers, and many became birdlike by the middle of the Triassic period. 60 million years ago the larger forms were wiped out, but the lineage survived as birds.
This is the scientific narrative.

How did every ingredient for life turn into life?

 

[disciple Clint]

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.

So it appears that you do not believe the bible is the word of God, am I wrong?

 

[John Bannister]

How did every ingredient for life turn into life?

I don't know by which process God sparked life.

So it appears that you do not believe the bible is the word of God, am I wrong?

John says that The Word is from the beginning and was always with God, and was God, and The Word came to us as a Man. That man was Yeshua, whose eyewitnesses wrote the Gospels, and took back the Old Testament from the Pharisees. The Bible is a record of the cultures and prophets of the line of Abraham, and their eye-witness testimonies of the power of The Word, but it is not it itself.

I have full faith in the gospel of John, and his Revelation, and from there I discovered the Spirit, and The Spirit showed me The Word.

 

[disciple Clint]

I don't know by which process God sparked life.



John says that The Word is from the beginning and was always with God, and was God, and The Word came to us as a Man. That man was Yeshua, whose eyewitnesses wrote the Gospels, and took back the Old Testament from the Pharisees. The Bible is a record of the cultures and prophets of the line of Abraham, and their eye-witness testimonies of the power of The Word, but it is not it itself.

I have full faith in the gospel of John, and his Revelation, and from there I discovered the Spirit, and The Spirit showed me The Word.

your mixing the word of God with the Word. The Word is Jesus who is God. The word of God is the bible. Now please answer the question.

 

[John Bannister]

your mixing the word of God with the Word. The Word is Jesus who is God. The word of God is the bible. Now please answer the question.

Why do you ask such a strange question? I follow the Scriptures, as you say you do. I teach from the Book which contains the record of the Word. Go away from me with word games.

 

[disciple Clint]

Why do you ask such a strange question? I follow the Scriptures, as you say you do. I teach from the Book which contains the record of the Word. Go away from me with word games.

Is the bible the truth as revealed by God? No word games on my part, how about a straight answer from you.

 

[John Bannister]

Is the bible the truth as revealed by God? No word games on my part, how about a straight answer from you.

If you put it that way, then yes, the Bible contains the truth as revealed by God. The thread of Revelation, from the perspectives of those who saw it.
Too many people attempt to force a false dichotomy with the question you asked.

 

[Estrid]

If you put it that way, then yes, the Bible contains the truth as revealed by God. The thread of Revelation, from the perspectives of those who saw it.
Too many people attempt to force a false dichotomy with the question you asked.

The falsehood I see over and over is people presenting
their personally chosen opinion of what the bible says
as Gods Word.
At the very best only one of the people with that claim
is right, and that seems like one too many.