The Creation Story: Literal, or Figurative?

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,608.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Wow. The "Mother of God" deluded by her own mythology? That's right up there with Darwin refuting the Apostle Paul. This is a mighty interesting thread. Thanks.
Why would Mary have not accepted 1st Cent Jewish understandings of the OT, and why would Paul know anything about the origins of humans?

The only reason to think that is the conservative Protestant commitment to inerrancy. But no reasonable look at the Bible would support that. That's why there are whole books trying to convince people that contradictions and differences of opinion among the authors aren't there, even though obviously they are.

Why did Jesus teach by stories designed to create personal reaction and change, rather than giving us theological and history textbooks? NT authors giving their personal witness is consistent with the way Jesus worked, and with the nature of the OT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,386
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,146.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why would Mary have not accepted 1st Cent Jewish understandings of the OT, and why would Paul know anything about the origins of humans?
If the writings are inspired by God, and I believe they are, then they should surpass such human limitations. I don't go as far as flawless inerrancy, but I think God is driving the content and not subject to future thought, or science, derailing him. Thus making the inspired writings pretty much worthless.

Saint Steven said:
Wow. The "Mother of God" deluded by her own mythology? That's right up there with Darwin refuting the Apostle Paul. This is a mighty interesting thread. Thanks.
 
Upvote 0

Jay Sea

................ Ke ĉiuj vivu
Mar 28, 2020
340
161
81
victoria
✟26,347.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Jesus referring to Adam as a real person:
Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
(Matthew 19:3-6 NASB;
Just because Yeshua used Adam as a name does not mean that a person called Adam realy existed. He was using Adam of the traditional stories to help people familiar with this character understand his intension in his message.
The Jewish people as are many ancient peoples, people of stories: stories that tell of their history and the relationship to their God. The trouble today is that many of us look for hard facts and have difficulty with the more complicated truths held in stories that require us to pray and meditate to produce the fruit of truth.
In LOve
Jay Sea
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,608.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
If the writings are inspired by God, and I believe they are, then they should surpass such human limitations. I don't go as far as flawless inerrancy, but I think God is driving the content and not subject to future thought, or science, derailing him. Thus making the inspired writings pretty much worthless.

Saint Steven said:
Wow. The "Mother of God" deluded by her own mythology? That's right up there with Darwin refuting the Apostle Paul. This is a mighty interesting thread. Thanks.
The question is how God chose to reveal himself. I think you have decided that if you were God you would send a more or less perfect message yourself. But humanity has a bad track record at judging what God will actually do. The same kind of reasoning said that he would never become human and die. I think it’s better to look at how God actually did it. All the evidence points to him acting in history and letting humans understand it in their own terms.
 
Upvote 0

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,386
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,146.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
NT authors giving their personal witness is consistent with the way Jesus worked, and with the nature of the OT.
Yet their writings support a literal view of the OT texts. And you claim it is because they didn't know any better? Where does that leave us? (sorry if I am getting under your skin with these comments)
 
  • Like
Reactions: public hermit
Upvote 0

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,386
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,146.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why did Jesus teach by stories designed to create personal reaction and change, rather than giving us theological and history textbooks?
The Church (capital C) claims they had the authority to give us these "theological and history textbooks". I question whether that was God's intention at all. We have ended up with a whole religion that basically worships a book. Take the book away and they would be lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: public hermit
Upvote 0

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,386
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,146.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think you have decided that if you were God you would send a more or less perfect message yourself.
I'm torn on that issue. Obviously the message sent was not perfect. The question, I suppose, is to what degree.

I'm not prepared to toss out Genesis and the creation account. I think the origins account is still important to the whole story.

I find myself navigating around the problems with the text like potholes in the road while I am driving my car. The road still goes where I want it to, but I'm trying to avoid the bumps. I would rather that road was repaired than to abandon my car.
 
Upvote 0

renniks

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2008
10,682
3,445
✟149,430.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Just because Yeshua used Adam as a name does not mean that a person called Adam realy existed. He was using Adam of the traditional stories to help people familiar with this character understand his intension in his message.
The Jewish people as are many ancient peoples, people of stories: stories that tell of their history and the relationship to their God. The trouble today is that many of us look for hard facts and have difficulty with the more complicated truths held in stories that require us to pray and meditate to produce the fruit of truth.
In LOve
Jay Sea
The Bible is real history or it isn't. If Adam wasn't a real person why would you believe Jesus was?
 
Upvote 0

renniks

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2008
10,682
3,445
✟149,430.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yet their writings support a literal view of the OT texts. And you claim it is because they didn't know any better? Where does that leave us? (sorry if I am getting under your skin with these comments)
It leaves us unable to believe their accounts of Jesus' life also.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

Dkh587

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 6, 2014
3,049
1,770
Southeast
✟552,407.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
This is an interesting topic to discuss, because there are points to be made on both sides. And I suppose there is a whole range of views from 100 percent literal to 100 percent figurative. (which makes no sense to me) I think the truth is somewhere in between and it may ultimately be a personal choice as to where you end up.

Did you see this list of criticisms of a literal view of the Bible from @public hermit ? What do you think of this?

1. God hates people (Esau I hated, but Jacob I loved)
2. Or worse, God tortures those God loves forever.
3. Defense of slavery
4. Women are to be submissive and shut up in church (and really anywhere else).
5. God commanded Israel to kill every living thing.
6. If God commands evil it's not evil (see 5)
7. If you just had enough faith you wouldn't need evil secular medicine/counseling
8. You can't be saved if you don't take Genesis literally.

I do think the history of the Scriptures is literal, ie creation, Adam & Eve, the flood, Moses delivering the Israelites out of Egypt, king David etc

Im not sure why people who profess faith in Jesus want to reject everything leading up to him being literal, but for some reason, all of a sudden, now Jesus is literal and historical. Just sounds like a bunch of booboo to me.

I think it’s a case of wanting the Bible to say what they think it should say, rather than accepting what it really says.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tryphena rose
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,386
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,146.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Bible is real history or it isn't. If Adam wasn't a real person why would you believe Jesus was?
Those who take the figurative view will be glad to tell you that the Bible isn't real history. At least the genesis account of origins. That doesn't bother them in the least. They are unaffected by that charge.

But you are right. If Adam wasn't a real person then would would Jesus be real. "Maybe he was just symbolic of something? Born of a virgin? Yeah, right. Did miracles? Fairy tales. Who would buy such garbage? Just a myth." (I don't agree, oh course)
 
Upvote 0

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,386
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,146.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Im not sure why people who profess faith in Jesus want to reject everything leading up to him being literal, but for some reason, all of a sudden, now Jesus is literal and historical. Just sounds like a bunch of booboo to me.
I want to understand where they are coming from. This has been a good topic from that perspective. I'm not ready to abandon my mostly literal view, but I am starting to see where they are coming from. There are problems on both sides.
 
Upvote 0

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Site Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,386
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,146.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think it’s a case of wanting the Bible to say what they think it should say, rather than accepting what it really says.
It's actually worse than that. Some believe that the writers of the Bible didn't know any better, but now we do and God expects us to use our reasoning to refute them. As if Darwin refutes the Apostle Paul. And Mary was deluded by tradition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dkh587
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,841.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why one head, two arms, two legs, a bottom to sit on, feet to walk with, eyes to see, ears to hear, etc. ???

Does God literally sit on a literal throne? Does he stand up and speak? Is his arm too short to save? Are these not human physical characteristics?

Steve wrote:
"- Was Adam created in the image of God, after his likeness? (appearance)"

I already answered that on my post. "God is not a man"
Numbers 23:19
God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?


He shows himself as a man to us so that we can commune and have understanding. But he isn't a man sitting on a throne unless that is how he wishes to appear.

God is a spirit.

John 4:24

24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”


As such he made Adam in his image, but as I said this was not in Adam's physical appearance but in his spirit.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Jesus had trouble with people who thought as most people on this thread do!

Rom_5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
1Co_15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co_15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
Nothing vague or mythical about Adam, they believed him to be real.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The creation story: (Genesis)
- Was the universe created in six literal days?
- Was Adam the first human, a created being?
- Was Adam created in the image of God, after his likeness? (appearance)
- Is the Genesis account literal, or figurative?
- Was the Genesis account based on an oral tradition? (origins myth)
- In reference to Adam, is the conclusion of the genealogy of Jesus correct? (see below)

Luke 3:38 NIV
the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Humans were re-made into the image of God, who is Spirit. "Adam" means Mankind.
 
Upvote 0

tryphena rose

Daughter of the Most High
Jun 3, 2019
328
513
Idaho
✟46,975.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wow. Here's a new facet to explore. Thanks for weighing in on this. Now we add a flat earth view as a literal interpretation. Interesting.

Sorry for chiming in kind of late into the discussion here. I too believe the Bible's cosmology, which is consistently described as a flat, stationary earth as Shrewd Manager perfectly presented in his post.

To answer some of your questions, since I see Shrewd Manager hasn't returned:

What other problems with the global view does a flat earth view solve?

It is said that Jesus went up taken by a cloud, and will return the same way. The heavens will be opened and He will descend. Do you think He goes through endless space to get here? That the earth is God's footstool, implies that it is just beneath Him. That satan and his angels fell down to earth, implying that besides God's place in heaven, there is only one other place you can go and that is down to earth. Noah's flood water fell on the world from the window openings in the firmament, implies that it couldn't have gone through lightyears to get here if it came right down on us. When Paul saw the heavenly vision of Christ, it specifically says, that he could see Christ above the brightness of the sun, which also infers that the sun isn't 93 million miles away because then that would be indiscernible. Jesus says that He is from above and we are from beneath. Does one believe the Bible when it says that God is above us, or rather do many hold to science fiction and say that He is in some other dimension? People opt for "other dimension" because they believe in an endless space and do not believe that God made a firmament and sits over the earth as the scriptures clearly say He does.

What are the consequences of one lie that the enemy can use against us, he gets us to believe in atheism. Because really without an evolved world we cannot have an evolved species of man. And the spherical, speck of meaningless earth, is the grounds for those belief systems. From atheism you get communism. Marx himself wrote that atheism is the beginning of communism. You get the ideas of 'planets', which is really just other earths that God never said that he created. He said He only created this earth. With the idea of planets, you get aliens. Which the demons can now insert themselves into our culture as some beneficial beings further evolved from us, coming to our aid. You get the governments and propaganda mouthpieces convincing you that man can destroy the earth with fossil fuels instead of God alone being able to destroy it, like how the bible states it. A world that is always in a state of calamity with the heavenly bodies in outer space, making us a constantly missed target instead of a place that is safeguarded by God's providence. You get a world that does not care, and think that earth is just insignificant if the universe goes on like an endless sea, and we are just a drop of its water. A less meaningful world, a less designed world.

It is the opposite effect of knowing that God only made this earth, and formed you and I in our mother's womb to live in a firmament encapsulated by water. That we would spend our lives down here underneath His feet in wonder of the world that He designed for us. That we would take this spiritual war more seriously when we realize that the fallen angels have come straight down to us, that they are all around us, stalking us like prey. With one lie you can bring in many more lies. Which is exactly how the enemy works.

Do you subscribe to a 24 hour day for each day of creation?

If you read through the creation account in Genesis 1, the Bible says specifically that the "evening and the morning were the blank day" making it clear that each day of creation is a 24 hour period.

Some softball preliminary questions for you. Why did God stop the sun and moon in the midst of heaven in Joshua 10:12-13 to bring a halt to the daylight, instead of stopping the earth, if it is said that we are supposed to be revolving around the sun and the moon revolving around us? Even specifically giving coordinates for where the sun and moon stopped, Gibeon and the valley of ajalon. How is that possible if the sun is millions of times the mass of the earth, to stand over one coordinate on the earth? How could either of these bodies just be stopped in the midst (middle of) of heaven, as if they are small orbs in the sky rotating around a still earth? That's because they are.

In psalms 19, it says the sun goes in circuits from one end of heaven to the other, further emphasizing this point. A circuit is a circle. It is saying that the sun encircles the earth not that the earth revolves around the sun. It says in the same verse that nothing escapes its heat, showing that the ends of heaven can't be too large or endless, because the sun is always shining somewhere on this earth. Makes all the sense in the world when you understand biblical cosmology, but no sense at all when you take up what man says. The firmament isn't very big compared to the alternative model, but it is big enough for us because it was designed for us. Why does the bible say that the earth is essentially still in what I count easily, 5 different verses? In no way could that be poetic. That it is motionless, still, unable to be moved, has foundations, stablished, etc. Very clear that the bible is stating that the earth does not move on its own. When the bible says the earth is a circle it is using the Hebrew word chug, meaning to draw out a circle like a compass, like you would do with paper. God could of easily have called the earth a spherical circle with the use of the Hebrew word dur, meaning ball in Hebrew. But He decided not to. There are just too many points that could be made that clearly shows that the bible is speaking of a different earth than what the world is talking about. It is always consistent and thus cannot be poetic. The bible is stating these things about the earth. The actual question, is if we believe the bible or not and are we scared to lose credibility and look crazy to the world?

Here's an image of the ancient Hebrew cosmology presented in the Bible, not that foolish looking image of a flat disk with water falling off it's edges hanging in space. That depiction is just laughable and not what the Bible describes at all.

Flat-Earth8.jpg
 
Upvote 0

tryphena rose

Daughter of the Most High
Jun 3, 2019
328
513
Idaho
✟46,975.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No. But I read it very carefully, knowing that I read a very ancient text that is not preserved very well and is quite ambiguous.
I'm genuinely curious, then why be a Christian if you believe the Bible isn't very well preserved and is ambiguous? Wouldn't that render the scriptures unreliable and at best, just a bunch of ancient stories that are farther detached from reality opposed to being the true word of God? Do you believe Jesus to be the savior of the world, and thus that being a main reason for you being a Christian?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

trophy33

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
9,245
3,683
N/A
✟150,145.00
Country
Czech Republic
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I got this message from some admin:

------
Blasphemy and Contempt of Christianity
It is considered blasphemy to insult or mock Christianity or any part of the Trinity-Father (God), Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. Honest debate about the nature of God and Christian Theology is allowed, but derogatory remarks are not. Contemptuous remarks regarding Christianity or Christian practices are not allowed.

Saying the bible contains some myths is contempt of Christian and it's beliefs.

------

If its a blasphemy or contempt to say that Bible contains some myths, I am not willing to participate in this thread anymore and I will not answer any more of your questions, because this forum does not allow to answer them freely and sincerely.
 
Last edited:
  • Friendly
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Shrewd Manager

Through him, in all things, more than conquerors.
Site Supporter
Aug 16, 2019
4,167
4,081
Melbourne
✟364,409.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I wouldn't say it's a matter of accommodating a secular position. Christian writers from early on have commented on the internal issues with the creation account (e.g. Origen, Augustine).

The early church adopted Ptolemaic geocentric cosmology. I suspect that was flat earth. The ancient conception of the world was flat 'across the board'. Only the insane arrogance of 'modern world' could ever accept something so patently ridiculous as heliocentrism. On the other hand, it's more likely an old Babylonian black magic trick.

https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/...s/2012/11/Ancient-Hebrew-view-of-universe.png

But at least Augustine and Origen were geocentrists, as was everyone in the church of all stripes up until the days of Newton, who invented 'gravity' as though that would explain how that kept everything 'as if' the earth was motionless. Earth gravity v Vacuum of space. Who will prevail? What a joke, Calvin, Luther and a string of Popes rightly called out heliocentrism as heretical and downright stupid. Geocentrism remains the official position of the Catholic Church, despite their apology to Mr Galileo, that old humbug.

Seriously, just accept the Bible account and don't be worrying about singing along with the foolishness of the world.
 
Upvote 0