The Creation Story: Literal, or Figurative?

Fervent said:

If a physical death, then how did that serve to meet the demand if the death demanded by sin was spiritual death?

Click to expand...

One deserves both physical and spiritual death (the 2nd one).

SkyWriting said:

One deserves both physical and spiritual death (the 2nd one).

Click to expand...

Ok, so then what did Jesus physical death accomplish? Or are you claiming Jesus died a spiritual death?

Isaac Jones said:

I agree. What do we do? Claim Genesis is high poetry, though it is quite unique, and call God either a liar either in part or whole?

The difficulties with accepting Gen. 1 are surrounding taking our study of now and imposing it on then. Now we know the speed of light, so we assume when God went to make everything He said “drats! I can’t do it in six days, light doesn’t move that fast!” Or can the light create both a source of light and the projection of that light through distance simultaneously? I believe He can, and He did. Because as you noted in Exodus 20:8-11 He tells us how fast He made everything. He even tells us that a reason for doing it that fast was to set a precedent for us to match Him.

I will also note it is interesting that He did not ask anyone for permission, nor reassure Himself we would understand. I’m fact the last chapters of Job are quite clear from God that we don’t understand.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum.

I claim that the Genesis gives the account of a real event that took place exactly as described.
I believe that not because of Genesis but because of all the other verses pointing back to it, verses that make no sense if Genesis was a myth.

For example,
Romans
18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.
How does that make sense unless Adam was a real flesh and blood man?

There are many verses like this and they all deserve proper study. If Genesis is myth then all the other scriptures based on Adam, Eve and creation should fit together, they don't. I have asked many times for answers about that and never received one. The last time I asked a few days ago all I got was hand waving and pot shots at my intelligence. That indicates they have no answer. If 'Genesis is myth' is true Biblical teaching, the answers should be easily backed up by scripture.

I have no difficulties with Genesis. If something contradicts scripture I assume it to be false/mistaken human logic and scripture to be correct.
Romans 3
Let God be true, and every human being a liar.

>>>"Now we know"
We know nothing, less than nothing. We think we know, we assume we know.
“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
God said this to Job, he is saying this to us too.

If- big if man has the speed of light correct this still means nothing. This is how things are now, now is not creation.
God moved the stars into place even if this was him literally moving stars way past the speed of light with the light traveling behind them into the place He decided or in some other way. This isn't for us to know at this time. It is for us to trust and obey.

Fervent said:

Fair point, though then what do we make Romans 6 declaration that we are delivered by entering into His death? Was His death a spiritual death, or a physical death? If a physical death, then how did that serve to meet the demand if the death demanded by sin was spiritual death?

Click to expand...

The fall created both spiritual and physical death. God didn't speak the curse for no reason. Physical death either came at the same instance as spiritual death (when Adam ate) and God was informing them of it, or physical death came in as God spoke the words of the curse. Either way sin brought in spiritual and physical death. The fact that physical death will be removed at the end also points to it not being simply part of things. God proclaimed his creation to be 'very good' -that does not include rotting flesh.

I assume those denying sin brought in physical death do so because it completely rubbishes the evolution theory which demands life and death over millions of years.

Fervent said:

Ok, so then what did Jesus physical death accomplish? Or are you claiming Jesus died a spiritual death?

Click to expand...

Jesus died physically and spiritually: Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? For a reason and that was so we would be first restored spiritually and later physically.

Fervent said:

Ok, so then what did Jesus physical death accomplish? Or are you claiming Jesus died a spiritual death?

Click to expand...

Not permanently, but he did go to hell for a few days, and if His Father was not there, then He was in Hell.

Fervent said:

Fair point, though then what do we make Romans 6 declaration that we are delivered by entering into His death? Was His death a spiritual death, or a physical death? If a physical death, then how did that serve to meet the demand if the death demanded by sin was spiritual death?

Click to expand...

Romans 6 is about baptism not judgment.

OldWiseGuy said:

Romans 6 is about baptism not judgment.

Click to expand...

Romans 6 is about how our baptism into Jesus death delivers us from judgment, so it's pretty directly related to the question at hand.

Fervent said:

Romans 6 is about how our baptism into Jesus death delivers us from judgment, so it's pretty directly related to the question at hand.

Click to expand...

Baptism is 'ritual' death of the old self and resurrection to new life in Christ Jesus. In a way Jesus' death was also a ritual although he was actually killed. I don't pretend to know the whole mystery of his death.

OldWiseGuy said:

Baptism is 'ritual' death of the old self and resurrection to new life in Christ Jesus. In a way Jesus' death was also a ritual although he was actually killed. I don't pretend to know the whole mystery of his death.

Click to expand...

Romans 6 isn't about being dunked in water, but our unification with Jesus in His death which satisfied the death demanded by sin. Though I didn' ask you about the whole mystery, simply whether His death was a physical death or a spiritual one. Since to me it seems fairly straightforward that Jesus' death was a physical one, and if spiritual death is demanded by sin then a physical death cannot satisfy that demand.

I am too tired to read.

coffee4u said:

Welcome to the forum.

I claim that the Genesis gives the account of a real event that took place exactly as described.
I believe that not because of Genesis but because of all the other verses pointing back to it, verses that make no sense if Genesis was a myth.

For example,
Romans
18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.
How does that make sense unless Adam was a real flesh and blood man?

There are many verses like this and they all deserve proper study. If Genesis is myth then all the other scriptures based on Adam, Eve and creation should fit together, they don't. I have asked many times for answers about that and never received one. The last time I asked a few days ago all I got was hand waving and pot shots at my intelligence. That indicates they have no answer. If 'Genesis is myth' is true Biblical teaching, the answers should be easily backed up by scripture.

I have no difficulties with Genesis. If something contradicts scripture I assume it to be false/mistaken human logic and scripture to be correct.
Romans 3
Let God be true, and every human being a liar.

>>>"Now we know"
We know nothing, less than nothing. We think we know, we assume we know.
“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
God said this to Job, he is saying this to us too.

If- big if man has the speed of light correct this still means nothing. This is how things are now, now is not creation.
God moved the stars into place even if this was him literally moving stars way past the speed of light with the light traveling behind them into the place He decided or in some other way. This isn't for us to know at this time. It is for us to trust and obey.

Click to expand...

We see God with limitations but God does things without any limitations.

FredVB said:

We see God with limitations but God does things without any limitations.

Click to expand...

Yes, exactly.

They don't have to line up with logic, reasons or natural factors.

The Bible reveals things, and does not show things to deceive. I can trust it over what actually contradicts what is revealed in the Bible. There are metaphors in the Bible, but what is not explained in how that is a metaphor is likely not a metaphor. But assumptions about what the Bible is showing are not necessarily right about what is shown. There are things not shown though they might be assumed to be shown from the Bible. God is not limited in anyway. Stars and galaxies might be many millions of lightspeed years away from us, God still is not limited from making them, even so far away, and yet providing for our needs as well, as God does. Yet if there is all the evidence showing the universe was around a very much longer time ago than the several thousands of years of humanity that we would understand from the Bible's revelation to us, whatever is assumed, the Bible does not tell us how long the formless earth was around, before there was creation for it into the world it was to become started with the creation week. So there is not necessary contradiction in that. We just don't know from revelation in the Bible, and all that understood by many from science could be right. And yet, there might be much more learned from science leaving it unsettled. Biological evolution of all life is something else, other than what is merely understood from science, and it still is not compatible, other than with some unexplained thinking of some who say the Bible passages are interpreted wrongly if they are understood to contradict that.

FredVB said:

the Bible does not tell us how long the formless earth was around, before there was creation for it into the world it was to become started with the creation week.

Click to expand...

Except scripture included all of it, including the heavens and earth from Genesis 1 into the 6 days.

Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Saint Steven said:

Yes, it is hard to steer around these literal claims about creation.

Even the length of a day is defined in Genesis chapter one as sunset and sunrise. Even though the sun wasn't created until day four. (if I remember correctly) There are problems with both the literal and the figurative views.

Click to expand...

You see there is no sun and see a problem. Why? Because you have said that God can't make a day and night cycle without the sun, you have limited him.

Did God have a problem with parting a sea? Stopping a storm, raising the dead? God can do whatever he wants, he isn't a man to be limited.

He had already created some form of light as one of the first acts of creation.
Genesis 1:3
And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.
Perhaps this shone on the earth as part of the day and night cycle or maybe it happened independently from that. We can speculate but we can't know how God created the day and night cycle at this point in time. It's to be taken on faith, not logic or reason.

Saint Steven said:

Thanks for your reply.
I am not saying there was a problem with God, I am saying there are problems with the text, and our view of it.

Click to expand...

That is human logic interfering with the text. The text itself is quite simple.

Genesis 1:5
God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

Is there anything difficult in there? I should think that sentence is easy enough for an 8 year old child to understand.

People keep putting their own logic, reasoning, intellect before God, before what the text says.
The issue is self not the text. People have this burning need to make things to make sense to their intellect rather than simply trusting. But the very nature of a miracle is it doesn't make sense, it defies all logic and reasoning.

There is an OT text that speaks about the sun standing still. This is quite remarkable and worthy of writing about.

Click to expand...

That is quite the verse I agree. Again there is no way of knowing how God did that, only that he did. We can speculate and put forward ideas, but at the end of the day we are looking at another act of God that defies logic. We can either put our logic first and end up saying it doesn't mean what it says it means or simply trust that it did.

But we have no explanation in the text of Genesis chapter one for how the first day could be measured by a sundown and sunrise when the sun had yet to be created.

Click to expand...

No we don't, does that matter?

This wanting an explanation is your intellect.

God gave us our intellect, but the intellect wasn't given for spiritual matters. Faith isn't your mind engaging and having something make logical sense and then you gain faith, it's your spirit. Belief in something isn't the same as faith.
Does Jesus raising on the third day make logical sense? Do you have a well thought out reason for how it happened or do you simply have faith that it did? That faith needs to extend past the resurrection of Jesus into all the things God shows us. Be it healing the blind to talking donkeys to the sun standing still.

Speculation is fine so long as it doesn't become a stumbling block. Don't let your intellect become a stumbling block to your faith.

Even you agree that the "light" came from something other than the sun. But hopefully neither of us would claim an actual sunset and sunrise without a created sun.

Click to expand...

Why not?
You do realize that the wording sunrise and sunset are only figurative language?
If the earth is a sphere (I honestly don't care if its round, flat or a potato) then the sun does not actually rise and set at all.

As I said, what I said was pure speculation. Remember also that God is not held in time like we are so perhaps the sun was there but also not there due to some time warp. My real guess is that the truth is so far out of our ability to even comprehend that its nothing we can even formulate into an idea.

If God says that there was a 'sunset' and a 'sunrise' then I will have faith that there was. I am quite sure that when we see God we will understand.

And again, this is a problem with the text, not with God. It seems that some people confuse the two, as if they are one and the same. The Bible is not God. (or shouldn't be a god)

Click to expand...

Scripture is not God but it is God's breathed word to us. .

2 Timothy 3:16-17

16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

Hebrews 4:12

12 For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Romans 10:17
Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ.

Scripture does not claim to be a good book full of truth and teaching, it claims to be God's breathed word that is living and can divide between soul and spirit.

Saint Steven said:

Yes, it is hard to steer around these literal claims about creation.

Even the length of a day is defined in Genesis chapter one as sunset and sunrise. Even though the sun wasn't created until day four. (if I remember correctly) There are problems with both the literal and the figurative views.

Click to expand...

How can there be problems with a figurative view, if it's figurative?