• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Was Moses a Ninny, a Yahoo, or both?

Status
Not open for further replies.

St. Worm2

Active Member
May 15, 2004
356
25
68
✟16,771.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I have always wondered, if any form of macro evolution is true, why the ruse from God?

Basic Darwinism, for example, seems simple enough to explain and comprehend, so if evolution is true, why the big ‘fairy tale’ to the contrary? Was Moses so far down on the evolutionary ladder that even the most fundamental of explanations would have too much for his mustard seed sized brain?

Or, if not, perhaps this 'story' wasn't about "Creation" at all? Perhaps it was God simply looking for a handy way to explain our races' universal corruption? But if this is true, why go to all the trouble of the fairy tale? Why not give a simple explanation of the "true" origins of life (IOW, evolution) and then just explain that as living things became more and more complex, they also became corrupt, or something along those lines? Why would God go so far as to talk about plants and animals reproducing "after their own kind" and do His best to explain away any sense of macro evolutionary advancement if it is indeed, true?

I have a number of other similar questions, but I'll stop and wait for these to be answered. If they have already been answered, and you don't want to waste time answering them again, I understand, but it would be great if you could give me a link to them!

Thanks!

Yours and His,
David
 

Karl - Liberal Backslider

Senior Veteran
Jul 16, 2003
4,157
297
57
Chesterfield
Visit site
✟28,447.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
You're working from a particular view of Biblical interpretation - that God, for all intents and purposes, sat down with Moses and said "OK, this is what happened - write this down, there may be a short quiz at the end of the period."

This is not how most Christians IME see it.

Rather, I would suggest (and we'll work within the traditional context of Mosaic authorship here because although I don't think it holds water it's not the issue) that the creation stories we have, in some form, predate the writing of Genesis as Scripture. These were versions of the common middle eastern creation myth.

What happened was that, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Moses wrote Genesis using the cosmology he had, but put a new twist on it. The created things are no longer gods; the creator does not have to struggle against primaeval chaos, but rather speaks and it is.

The reason therefore that the literary vehicle for the creation stories is what it is, then, is that that is the mythological vehicle that was already in existence in the minds of the community out of which the Genesis stories came. The Holy Spirit's part was to take this story and breathe theological truth about God, about creation, and about humanity, into it.
 
Reactions: lucaspa
Upvote 0

seebs

God Made Me A Skeptic
Apr 9, 2002
31,917
1,530
20
Saint Paul, MN
Visit site
✟70,235.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Here's one explanation:

 
Upvote 0

Vance

Contributor
Jul 16, 2003
6,666
264
59
✟30,780.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If Genesis 1 and 2 was meant by God to be given as an historical account of what actually happened, then the question may be valid. If, instead, to be a powerful poetic and metaphorical telling which provides us with all we need to know as a foundation for God's ultimate Message in Scripture (God created everything and is in charge of everything, Man created for a special relationship with Him, Man's Fallen nature and need for redemption, God's providing the redemptive gift of His Son for our salvation), then it does its job in spades!!! And adds in some additional extremely important messages directly from God as well (the nature of temptation, etc, etc).

If I was writing for this purpose, I could not think of a better way of doing it than using a form and type of story that the peoples of the world were familiar with.
 
Upvote 0

lucaspa

Legend
Oct 22, 2002
14,569
416
New York
✟39,809.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
But not if the language doesn't have the words. The Bible doesn't come with a Glossary of new terms. It uses the Hebrew language as it was at the time. And the Bible is written also for those who do not have the Spirit, in order to guide them to the Spirit. So, if the Bible can only be interpreted and read by those already with the Spirit, then it is useless for one of its major functions.

While God is very powerful, the humans were limited. God is forced, all the way thru the Bible, to limit Himself to the languages and concepts humans have.

Which is why the real story of how God created is in His Creation. God can just wait until we are smart enough to read that book for ourselves.
 
Upvote 0

lucaspa

Legend
Oct 22, 2002
14,569
416
New York
✟39,809.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
St. Worm2 said:
I have always wondered, if any form of macro evolution is true, why the ruse from God?

Simple. It's not a ruse and macroevolution is true.

There was no "fairy tale to the contrary". Instead, there are stubborn people, both theist and atheist, who refuse to remember who Genesis 1-3 was written for and insiste on taking it out of its time and place and making it something it isn't.

Genesis 2-3 is about why humans are cut off from God.

BTW, which Hebrew word, exactly, means "evolution"? Which Hebrew word would you use to say "protocells" or "amino acid"? Look all the way thru the OT at all the Hebrew words, and tell us which one or ones fit the bill.

David, Karl gave most of the answer: Genesis 1-3 are two theological stories explaining theological truths in ways that were meaningful to the people of the time. They are not a primitive way to explain how God created.
 
Upvote 0

seebs

God Made Me A Skeptic
Apr 9, 2002
31,917
1,530
20
Saint Paul, MN
Visit site
✟70,235.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Once there was a little girl. She asked her father what he did, and he said that he built houses. She was happy about this, and told all her friends that her father built houses. Being a little girl, she imagined that he must be very strong indeed to build houses; they look quite heavy. When she was older, she found paperwork in his office, describing "subcontracting agreements". According to these agreements, her father organized people, and the people he organized did the physical labor; he might or might not even physically go to a given place where a house was being built, because the people who worked for him were able to take the plans, which he designed, and build a house as he described it. But he paid them, and when the work was done, the house was his to sell.

There are two questions here:
1. Would you describe his explanation that he "builds houses" as a lie, or a ruse?
2. Given the context in which I told this story, do you think it matters whether or not the little girl described actually lived and had these experiences?
 
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
60
✟43,600.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
as always seebs,
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.