The Creation Story: Literal, or Figurative?

[coffee4u]

Well, let's face it, we all come with our own preconceptions about what the Bible is supposed to be about. So, the various backgrounds represented even just on this forum cover quite a range of perspective.

There was a time when I would argue my point of view as exclusively true, in the interest of correcting others. But over time, and in the interest of learning to understand others in the church (the Body of Christ), I have taken a more open and receptive posture. I'm still growing into this, but making some progress.

I would rather understand where someone else is coming from than try to convert them to my way of thinking. But we all have something to sell, I guess.

Did you actually watch the video? I would be interested in your comments on it. Thanks.

It's not as bad as it looks on the surface. He asks some fair questions, and knows what he is talking about.

No I didn't, we have been having storms, including a tornado in my state. I have been off and on all day. My internet keeps dropping out. I will save it for later and give you my thoughts.

 

[coffee4u]

Did you actually watch the video? I would be interested in your comments on it. Thanks..

I watched until about 2:45 where he lost me. "The Bible promotes polygamy and supports slavery" No, no it doesn't. Not spending 19 minutes of my life wasted on someone who thinks like that. See enough of that on here.

 

[Saint Steven]

Not before the sun was created on day 4.

Interesting that the text indicates a sunset and sunrise for days one through three. (when the sun wasn't created until day four) --- literal of figurative?

 

[Saint Steven]

Adam (mankind) experienced morality problems due to his ego.
God re-made man into his spiritual image and it didn't go well.

Is this a comparative of the accounts in Genesis chapter one and two. (two creation accounts) What was the first mortality problem you mentioned? And a "remake"? (chapter two, I suppose?)

 

[Saint Steven]

I watched until about 2:45 where he lost me. "The Bible promotes polygamy and supports slavery" No, no it doesn't. Not spending 19 minutes of my life wasted on someone who thinks like that. See enough of that on here.

He wasn't saying that he believed that personally, but that some do, which is correct. However, he is a Yale Professor, so it needs to be viewed with that in mind.

What do the contradicting presentations of the creation accounts in Genesis chapters one and two mean to you? Or even the contradictions in chapter one. The sunset and sunrise each day when the sun was not created until day four, for instance. Inspired and inerrant? Who should we blame for these glaring problems?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Could the earth produce (bring forth) vegetation (the third day) without the presence of sunlight?

 

[coffee4u]

He wasn't saying that he believed that personally, but that some do, which is correct. However, he is a Yale Professor, so it needs to be viewed with that in mind.

What do the contradicting presentations of the creation accounts in Genesis chapters one and two mean to you? Or even the contradictions in chapter one. The sunset and sunrise each day when the sun was not created until day four, for instance. Inspired and inerrant? Who should we blame for these glaring problems?

I will post back in detail on this tomorrow since it's gone 11:30 at night -now the weather clears up.

There are no contradictions, just human beings who can't wrap their minds around God's greatness and try and make him fit inside their own mind with it's constrictive logic and reasons.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Genesis 1: The Outline.
Genesis 2: The Details.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

"In the beginning".

Strong's Hebrew;

The KJV translates Strong's H7225 in the following manner: beginning (18x), firstfruits (11x), first (9x), chief (8x), miscellaneous (5x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

1. first, beginning, best, chief
   1. beginning
      
      
   2. first
      
      
   3. chief
      
      
   4. choice part

How is it possible to arrive at chaos and disorder from this definition? Has any here ever "created" (fabricated, constructed, built) something that fell into complete disorder during the creation process? Order only comes from disorder through corrective measures, not creative measures. In other words the heavens and the earth were created in perfection, but then fell into disorder (see Gap Theory). Genesis 1 and 2 is story of the repair of an earth in disarray (tohu and bohu), not the original creation.

 

[Saint Steven]

Could the earth produce (bring forth) vegetation (the third day) without the presence of sunlight?

That's another great question.

 

[Saint Steven]

I will post back in detail on this tomorrow since it's gone 11:30 at night -now the weather clears up.

There are no contradictions, just human beings who can't wrap their minds around God's greatness and try and make him fit inside their own mind with it's constrictive logic and reasons.

Oh good, hopefully you can clear this up for us.

 

[coffee4u]

Oh good, hopefully you can clear this up for us.

Your sarcasm is dripping. If you do not wish to discuss scripture than I have no time to answer.

 

[zoidar]

...
If God did create everything less then 10,000 years ago, why might He want it to look like it was 14 billion years old?

A good question...

 

[zoidar]

- Was the universe created in six literal days?

I don't think so.

- Was Adam the first human, a created being?

I believe "Adam" was the first human. I have my doubts about the "instant creation of Adam" account.

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

Created in God's image, yes! I think of the soul not the physical appearance, no!

- Is the Genesis account literal, or figurative?

I believe figurative.

- Was the Genesis account based on an oral tradition? (origins myth)

It might or might not be. Hard to say.

- 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.

Yes, from a certain point of view.

 

[SkyWriting]

He wasn't saying that he believed that personally, but that some do, which is correct. However, he is a Yale Professor, so it needs to be viewed with that in mind.

What do the contradicting presentations of the creation accounts in Genesis chapters one and two mean to you? Or even the contradictions in chapter one. The sunset and sunrise each day when the sun was not created until day four, for instance. Inspired and inerrant? Who should we blame for these glaring problems?

People who insist that the accounts are literal days rather than a different message.
The same problem exists with "The begats" when people try to use them to gauge the age of the earth.
That's not the point of providing them.

 

[Saint Steven]

People who insist that the accounts are literal days rather than a different message.
The same problem exists with "The begats" when people try to use them to gauge the age of the earth.
That's not the point of providing them.

If you step away from the literal reading, do you enter a place where any interpretation is valid? I was raised in a church that taught that it was literal. (the "days" and the "begats") Outside the literal reading, I am at a loss to know what to make of it. Not sure if I want to get on that boat - lol

 

[OldWiseGuy]

A literal meaning can also be a metaphor or type. They are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Fervent]

Theologically the creation story has to be taken at face value. If there is death before sin, then Jesus' death does not accomplish the stated end of conquering death through atonement for sin because sin is not the cause of death. And so we cannot accept a paradigm in which sin is not directly responsible for death. Now, we may propose alternative understandings of reality in which there is not such a naive correspondence which complicates the whole matter and rectifies this discrepancy between theories of science and theological imperatives so that does not mean we have to take it as actual history though it seems to me such a process would be more about appeasing enlightenment sensibilities than dealing with the implications.

 

[SkyWriting]

If you step away from the literal reading, do you enter a place where any interpretation is valid? I was raised in a church that taught that it was literal. (the "days" and the "begats") Outside the literal reading, I am at a loss to know what to make of it. Not sure if I want to get on that boat - lol

There really is no such thing as "Literal". There is "more" literal and "Less".
"More literal" is the language of today and most common definitions.
Less is about less common meanings of words. And words do have many meanings.

So the most literal meaning for "God created man" is "God made cities" as a process that took time.
90% of the uses for "made" or "Created" are long time consuming changes. That is the most literal.

Most important, you wouldn't use a word for "making a cake" and reuse the same word for "Making a planet out of thin air" . You would make up a new word if you had to.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Theologically the creation story has to be taken at face value. If there is death before sin, then Jesus' death does not accomplish the stated end of conquering death through atonement for sin because sin is not the cause of death. And so we cannot accept a paradigm in which sin is not directly responsible for death.

Jesus' death doesn't atone for the appointed death of all that are mortal (flesh and blood) but for the eternal death penalty that results from unrepented sin.