The Creation Story: Literal, or Figurative?

[trophy33]

Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate it.

Tell me more about your Adam as priest idea. That's a new concept to me. And seems to assume Adam was one of many people alive at that time. How does that work?

I am familiar with Melchizedek being a priest of God and Jethro the father-in-law of Moses being the priest of Midian in Ur of the Chaldees. But those were downstream a considerable distance from Adam.

A priest, or better to say a proto-priest - a specific individual selected from the group of already existing people, to be specially with God as our representative, ambassador, with whom God established the "paradise covenant".

Similarly to Abraham, representing all the believers, with whom God established the abrahamic covenant.

Similarly to Israel being a special nation from the whole earth full of nations in the "waiting for the Messiah era", with whom God established the mosaic covenant.

 

[Saint Steven]

It’s not where I draw a line but what the evidence seems to show.

Again, there are better sources, within your own Church. I'm more knowledgable about the Gospels and Paul. But I'll summarize the little I know.

Thanks, I appreciate the detailed explanation. (which I left out of the quote)

Do you see some difficulties with your view? I certainly see them in my view. (and others views) You seem to see some elements in Genesis as historic, or possibly historic. Like Abraham.

 

[Jamsie]

With such immediacy, I wonder why it took all day. Wasn't it done as soon as he said it? "God said... and it was so."

Exactly, in verse 3 it was immediate "...and there was light"... seems further that the command/fiat was the sole agency. Subsequent verses directly command matter to the task...so the command is given setting in motion all of the laws for the incipient powers, elements, material, etc. as to the natural processes of phenomena to be produced? Again, it would have been quite simple to express immediacy as in verse 3...but it does not.

 

[Saint Steven]

A priest, or better to say a proto-priest - a specific individual selected from the group of already existing people, to be specially with God as our representative, ambassador, with whom God established the "paradise covenant".

Similarly to Abraham, representing all the believers, with whom God established the abrahamic covenant.

Similarly to Israel being a special nation from the whole earth full of nations in the "waiting for the Messiah era", with whom God established the mosaic covenant.

Thanks, that's helpful.

So, you see Adam as part of a group of people even though the text presents him as the first man? (from whom the first woman was made)

There seems to be lots of problems on both sides of this discussion. But maybe not from your perspective.

I was just thinking that a man formed from dust and a woman made from his rib seem more symbolic than real. But I have always taken that as literal. (the all-or-nothing literal view)

 

[trophy33]

Thanks, that's helpful.

So, you see Adam as part of a group of people even though the text presents him as the first man? (from whom the first woman was made)

There seems to be lots of problems on both sides of this discussion. But maybe not from your perspective.

I was just thinking that a man formed from dust and a woman made from his rib seem more symbolic than real. But I have always taken that as literal. (the all-or-nothing literal view)

I do not hold any specific view. Its so old text and our thinking today is so different, that I am OK with "I will not understand what this or this meant in their times". I know about some possibilities and thats pretty much it.

The times I wanted every word in the Bible to be clear and certain, are in the past

Yes, for me its not a problem. Its probably more about our view about the Bible as such. And about our view of inspiration as such.

 

[Saint Steven]

Exactly, in verse 3 it was immediate "...and there was light"... seems further that the command/fiat was the sole agency. Subsequent verses directly command matter to the task...so the command is given setting in motion all of the laws for the incipient powers, elements, material, etc. as to the natural processes of phenomena to be produced? Again, it would have been quite simple to express immediacy as in verse 3...but it does not.

The "lights in the expanse" we know to be at a great distance (light years away), but described as if immediately visible. As if processes were hurried along, or created with maturity, like Adam.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Nope can't see it. Right from Day 1, not starting from Day 4 but Day 1 we read at the end of each Day 1-3 "And the evening and the morning were the first day"

That clearly means a Day as we think of a DAY cycle.....evening, morning...if there wasn't day/morning he wouldn't have said so.

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Gen 1:3

It was indeed a day and night cycle, but unlike the solar one we observe nowadays.

God still sees the created light of the first day.

However, we do not.

For this reason, time flows differently on earth than in heaven.

The Young Earth Creationist idea does not actually read the text literally, that's part of the problem.

 

[Saint Steven]

I do not hold any specific view. Its so old text and our thinking today is so different, that I am OK with "I will not understand what this or this meant in their times". I know about some possibilities and thats pretty much it.

The times I wanted every word in the Bible to be clear and certain, are in the past

Yes, for me its not a problem. Its probably more about our view about the Bible as such. And about our view of inspiration as such.

I was having similar thoughts. This subject calls into question inerrancy and inspiration. --- EDIT --- We are already skating on thin ice with this topic as it relates to the Creed. "... by whom all things were made; (Hebrews 1:1-2) ..."

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Example of a figurative application of the seven days of creation.

Day 1, characterized by black and white thinking, this is not the end of all creative thought processes, but making distinctions is important.

Day 2, characterized by making distinctions between identical concepts, such as water and water being separated by the atmosphere.

Day 3, characterized by creating a livable space, this is the day of a creative process where it begins to actually apply to other people.

Day 4, characterized by replacing the crude day 1 thought processes with more specific ones.

Day 5, Characterized by the distinctions being brought to life.

Day 6, Characterized by the livable space being brought to life.

Day 7, every creative process involves resting so the mind can conceive more things to create, all work and no rest destroys an imagination.

To note, figurative processes that base themselves on the seven days of creation can easily run in parallel with a literal interpretation - that is, if you have enough imagination.

 

[trophy33]

I was having similar thoughts. This subject calls into question inerrancy and inspiration. --- EDIT --- We are already skating on thin ice with this topic as it relates to the Creed. "... by whom all things were made; (Hebrews 1:1-2) ..."

Its good to notice that the creeds of the church obviously tried to stay as general as possible and to postulate only the most basic things. Because there were allegorical, literal and all possible views in all church history.

Yes, we can agree that God created everything. Thats the most basic statement

 

[tryphena rose]

God gave us logic to use it, not to break it.

A colorful picture can contain both black and white colors, but a color cannot be both white and black in the same time and place.

Although we have logic, God tells us specifically in His Word many times to not lean on our understanding. To humble ourselves and to trust fully in Him - to come to Him as a little child; not puffed up in our own pride and the thoughts within our own heads. Far too often we can think we're too smart and have everything figured out. Which is why God seeks after a humble heart and not a haughty spirit. Do we think we know better than the Lord? Then the King of Kings whose power and might is far beyond our mere human understanding? When we stand before Him, certainly it will be in trembling, fear and complete awe and all of our precious logic will fade into obscurity as we behold the True and Everlasting Light.

We need more humility and more abandonment of where men professes themselves to be wise. We need to simply let God be true. We need to allow God to remove the veil from our eyes so we can begin to see clearly the Truths He's placed within this World; Truths that are more clear and simple the we make them out to be with all of our mental gymnastics.

Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil. Proverbs 3:5-7

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, Romans 1:20-22

And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 18:3-4

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. Proverbs 9:10

 

[Jamsie]

The "lights in the expanse" we know to be at a great distance (light years away), but described as if immediately visible. As if processes were hurried along, or created with maturity, like Adam.

Well, perhaps...what is not explained is why the commands directly to the land, water. It does not explain how one makes a distinction between verse 3 and verse 14... which is why Genesis 1 should be taken with humble approach, much is left unanswered and open to various reasoned interpretations. Again, it depends on how one understands "it was so"... I think of that phrase as God's command being completed in His time. Further, "God made" statements can not be but parenthetical or explanatory for otherwise God's spoken fiat was ineffectual... Thus "God made" is based simply on His speaking... to believe that God "formed" or made each individual star, plant, creature, etc. again negates his direct commands to already created matter to produce.

 

[trophy33]

Although we have logic, God tells us specifically in His Word many times to not lean on our understanding. To humble ourselves and to trust fully in Him - to come to Him as a little child; not puffed up in our own pride and the thoughts within our own heads. Far too often we can think we're too smart and have everything figured out. Which is why God seeks after a humble heart and not a haughty spirit. Do we think we know better than the Lord? Then the King of Kings whose power and might is far beyond our mere human understanding? When we stand before Him, certainly it will be in trembling, fear and complete awe and all of our precious logic will fade into obscurity as we behold the True and Everlasting Light.

We need more humility and more abandonment of where men professes themselves to be wise. We need to simply let God be true. We need to allow God to remove the veil from our eyes so we can begin to see clearly the Truths He's placed within this World; Truths that are more clear and simple the we make them out to be with all of our mental gymnastics.

Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil. Proverbs 3:5-7

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, Romans 1:20-22

And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 18:3-4

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. Proverbs 9:10

Not sure what the point is... that faith can be logically inconsistent?

 

[Saint Steven]

... We need to simply let God be true. We need to allow God to remove the veil from our eyes so we can begin to see clearly the Truths He's placed within this World; Truths that are more clear and simple the we make them out to be with all of our mental gymnastics. ...

I like what you are saying here.
I am quite uncomfortable with the idea that the inspired writers of the Bible lacked the forward-looking insight to unfold the story of our origins that was enough to account for everything it needed to. I want to understand the figurative view. But it has yet to speak to me in a meaningful way. There are problems with both views, but not enough for me to abandon a mostly literal view.

 

[Saint Steven]

Well, perhaps...what is not explained is why the commands directly to the land, water. It does not explain how one makes a distinction between verse 3 and verse 14... which is why Genesis 1 should be taken with humble approach, much is left unanswered and open to various reasoned interpretations. Again, it depends on how one understands "it was so"... I think of that phrase as God's command being completed in His time. Further, "God made" statements can not be but parenthetical or explanatory for otherwise God's spoken fiat was ineffectual... Thus "God made" is based simply on His speaking... to believe that God "formed" or made each individual star, plant, creature, etc. again negates his direct commands to already created matter to produce.

The figurative view is very locked into the Genesis account and parsing words.

It is obvious that elsewhere in the Bible the literal view is upheld. Unless I am overlooking something. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.

 

[Bobber]

It was indeed a day and night cycle, but unlike the solar one we observe nowadays.

God still sees the created light of the first day.

Indeed as if you've got some clear record to back up anything you're saying. Doesn't seem like you do. If you do show the actual scripture that supports this. If you're making this up on the fly at least admit that's what you're doing. So show scripture which shows God still sees the of the first day and what's that's supposed to mean. Sorry but until then Day 1 had a 24 hours cycle of morning and evening.

For this reason, time flows differently on earth than in heaven.

And again we don't have any absolute knowledge of what time does, or is in the higher realm. Pure speculation.

The Young Earth Creationist idea does not actually read the text literally, that's part of the problem.

So tell us why YEC don't take the text "literally" I demonstrated that's exactly what I was doing so show me why I didn't. You on the other hand it seems just made things up as in the Day 1 Morning/Evening wasn't like all the others after the 4 day.

 

[Saint Steven]

Not sure what the point is... that faith can be logically inconsistent?

It used to bother me that we couldn't put the puzzle together, as it were. Then it dawned on me that if we could, then faith would not be required.

 

[Saint Steven]

Indeed as if you've got some clear record to back up anything you're saying. Doesn't seem like you do. If you do show the actual scripture that supports this. If you're making this up on the fly at least admit that's what you're doing. So show scripture which shows God still sees the of the first day and what's that's supposed to mean. Sorry but until then Day 1 had a 24 hours cycle of morning and evening.

C'mon now. We don't need chapter and verse for every idea shared on this thread. MC was defending a figurative view. That is bound to be more abstract. I'm fine with that. In fact, it seems feasible to postulate that God can still see that original light from creation. When we shine a light into outer space, when does it stop? Never, as far as we know.

Michael Collum said: ↑
It was indeed a day and night cycle, but unlike the solar one we observe nowadays.

God still sees the created light of the first day.

 

[Saint Steven]

And again we don't have any absolute knowledge of what time does, or is in the higher realm. Pure speculation.

There have actually been experiments done on earth to show the effects of gravity on the speed of time. It is theorized that time runs much slower in the outer reaches of space. A bit like a 33 RPM phonograph record. The RMPs in the center are faster than the RPMs in the outer rim. Yet they all run on the same hub speed.

 

[Saint Steven]

So tell us why YEC don't take the text "literally" I demonstrated that's exactly what I was doing so show me why I didn't. You on the other hand it seems just made things up as in the Day 1 Morning/Evening wasn't like all the others after the 4 day.

@Michael Collum made a good point that the sun wasn't created until day four. Isn't that the sort chapter and verse you are demanding? The question is, what created the light in the previous days.