Why Acceptance of the Genesis Account is Extremely Important For Christians

[Jipsah]

Sounds as if you are totally unfamiliar with the meaning of Plato's Cave Allegory

No, I went to high school too. <Laugh>

It simply means that statements of suppos

s are worthless unless supported by reliable evidence.

Apparently geological evidence doesn't count. <Laugh>

Calling Plato old doesn't prove that statement false. In fact, it comes across as immature and peevish.

You're don't understand Southern idioms very well, do you? No worries. But I'm also a ham operator, and in hamspeak, every male old enough to key a transmitter or work a CW paddle is addressed as "old man" (or just OM in code).

Just a little anthropological sidebar for ya there, OM.

 

[Jipsah]

A Christian that doesn't believe in the Genesis account sounds very strange to me

Depends on what "doesn't believe" means. If it means believing that God created everything, then yeash, we all believe it. If it means He did it in a literal week, we're less likely to believe it, since there was no real basis foor knowing what a "day" was then, especially before the sun was created. (Also considering that we're told that one of our days is like 1000 years to God, and that 1000 of our years is like a day to Him. No reason to believe that in the case of Genesis we're dealing with precise periods of time as we humans reckon it, when geological and astronomical evidence so strongly militates against it. And in any case, we're saved by grace, through faith, and that not of ourselves, and not by holding the right opinions of things we can't prove.

Bit it seems that those who do not, are p[lacing their believe system not on the word of God but on man's science.

Sciences records what it sees, punto. The Bible says God made everything, we believe it. Science says it took a long time, based upon observation, we believe it. The dichotomy there is phony.

The communion turning into the actual blood and flesh of Jesus is not being replaced by science but by Jesus saying His words were spiritual.

So, ready to "spiritualize" everything He said on that basis? Or just the stuff He said that step on your group's doctrines?

 

[Jipsah]

The feeding of the 5000 or walking on water are not mentioned.

In John 6? Get another Bible, that one's broke.

 

[mmksparbud]

Take, eat:
this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Mat_4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

They are spirit---these are the words of Jesus also.

2Ti_3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti_2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.


Genesis was part of the ALL SCRIPTURE---in fact, it was the only scripture, for the OT was not yet written, they were letters sent out. The studying they did, was of the old testament. It is what Jesus read, studied, and taught. Genesis 1 was given by inspiration of God as was Revelation. To insist otherwise, is to not only throw out the caviar and eat the can---it is to throw out the caviar and the can. (Caviar is truly best fresh and not canned)

 

[mmksparbud]

Some people want to spiritualize the Genesis account, but want to take what Jesus spoke of as spiritual into the literal.
A day is stated in Genesis as what it is---an evening and a morning. The rotation of the earth was set in place, producing the 24 hr day. What God says is--evening and morning--one day. But then, maybe they are flat earthers that do not believe that the earth rotates. The poetic language of the bible is also translated as literal, except for the Genesis account, that is somehow only spiritual even though nothing states that.

 

[Jipsah]

For all practical rhetorical effects that's exactly what you are saying via adopting an inflexible symbolically incapable Jesus.

So let's see, if we happen to believe, as many of us do, that our Lord actually meant what He said from time to time, then it means we believe that He was incapable of using symbolism. That's remarkably weird "logic", isn't it?

For mercy's sake, and for the sake of sanity learn what the acceptable literary devices are.

Things that were never used in Genesis, right? <Laugh>

There is no common basis for further discussion anyway since you are talking about a Triune God and I am not.

Well, the fact is that you shouldn't be participating in this thread at all, since this forum is restricted to Nicene Christians.

Totally irrelevant from the subject matter perspective but seemingly of paramount importance to you

Apparently St. Paul took very much the same view, but then his opinion may not signify in your religion either.

 

[Radrook]

So let's see, if we happen to believe, as many of us do, that our Lord actually meant what He said from time to time, then it means we believe that He was incapable of using symbolism. That's remarkably weird "logic", isn't it?

Things that were never used in Genesis, right? <Laugh>

Well, the fact is that you shouldn't be participating in this thread at all, since this forum is restricted to Nicene Christians.

Apparently St. Paul took very much the same view, but then his opinion may not signify in your religion either.

?????

 

[Lazy_Pink_Nights]

Baloney. I don't think that it makes any real difference whether a Christian has read Genesis at all or not. We're saved by Christ, not by having the "correct" opinion of Genesis.

But dude like, you have to ask yourself what does being "saved by Christ" mean? Is it just "Oh I consider myself a Christian woo get out of jail free card" or is there more to this relationship? I think it makes a HUGE difference whether or not a Christian has read Genesis. Considering this has the creation of the world and the entrance of sin into it - I mean... the WHOLE reason Jesus kind of came down from heaven and died for us was to save us from sin... introduced in.... Genesis. To take the writings in Genesis as metaphorical you take away some MAJOR points to salvation...

 

[Radrook]

But dude like, you have to ask yourself what does being "saved by Christ" mean? Is it just "Oh I consider myself a Christian woo get out of jail free card" or is there more to this relationship? I think it makes a HUGE difference whether or not a Christian has read Genesis. Considering this has the creation of the world and the entrance of sin into it - I mean... the WHOLE reason Jesus kind of came down from heaven and died for us was to save us from sin... introduced in.... Genesis. To take the writings in Genesis as metaphorical you take away some MAJOR points to salvation...

Absolutely! If we mess with the Genesis account we are striking at the very foundation of everything salvational based on it and at the trustworthiness of those who cited from the Book of Genesis such as Paul, Peter, and Jesus himself. Those who say it makes no difference probably don't fully understand how one is essential to the other. That's why one should be fully familiar with the basis of Christianity before one engages in criticisms of the biblical text. I think that part of the problem stems from the erroneous albeit popular notion that the Bible can be forced to say anything and everything that might come to a reader's mind. LOL!

 

[ViaCrucis]

But dude like, you have to ask yourself what does being "saved by Christ" mean? Is it just "Oh I consider myself a Christian woo get out of jail free card" or is there more to this relationship?

Nobody has suggested salvation is just a "get out of jail free card".

I think it makes a HUGE difference whether or not a Christian has read Genesis. Considering this has the creation of the world and the entrance of sin into it - I mean... the WHOLE reason Jesus kind of came down from heaven and died for us was to save us from sin... introduced in.... Genesis. To take the writings in Genesis as metaphorical you take away some MAJOR points to salvation...

If sin didn't literally enter the world because of a talking snake and two people eating fruit, is the reality of sin any less a reality? Or is sin and death still part of this world, part of our human experience?

How can Christ's work to redeem us from sin and death be lessened if we don't take the stories in Genesis literally? The reality of sin and death is observed with our own eyes every hour of every day in ourselves, in our world, everywhere.

I don't need to believe in a literal talking snake, or two people literally eating fruit in order to recognize the reality that mortality, sin, suffering are all part of this world and that there is all something fundamentally wrong about it. I don't need to believe that the stories in Genesis are literally true to recognize sin in myself and my need of God's mercy and grace--I am a sinner regardless of whether Genesis 3 is literal or not literal. And Christ came to save sinners.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[nChrist]

God tells us what He wants us to know about Himself and His creation in the Holy Bible. Genesis is the foundation for the Holy Bible, so it is very important. God's Creation of man is a good example:

Genesis 1:26-28 KJV And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Genesis 2:7 KJV And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

 

[Radrook]

Nobody has suggested salvation is just a "get out of jail free card".




If sin didn't literally enter the world because of a talking snake and two people eating fruit, is the reality of sin any less a reality? Or is sin and death still part of this world, part of our human experience?

How can Christ's work to redeem us from sin and death be lessened if we don't take the stories in Genesis literally? The reality of sin and death is observed with our own eyes every hour of every day in ourselves, in our world, everywhere.

I don't need to believe in a literal talking snake, or two people literally eating fruit in order to recognize the reality that mortality, sin, suffering are all part of this world and that there is all something fundamentally wrong about it. I don't need to believe that the stories in Genesis are literally true to recognize sin in myself and my need of God's mercy and grace--I am a sinner regardless of whether Genesis 3 is literal or not literal. And Christ came to save sinners.

-CryptoLutheran

There is far more involved than eating fruit. Your description of it that way indicates serious lack essential knowledge. It also indicates an agenda to denigrate the account in any way possible via ridicule.

 

[ViaCrucis]

There is far more involved than eating fruit. Your description of it that way indicates serious lack essential knowledge. It also indicates an agenda to denigrate the account in any way possible via ridicule.

The point is to draw attention to the discrete details of the narrative which are being put forward as necessary to be believed as literally true.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Genesis is the foundation for the Holy Bible,

Jesus Christ is the foundation of Scripture. He is its Foundation, He is its Theme and Subject, and He is its Telos, its point, its goal, its purpose.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Radrook]

The point is to draw attention to the discrete details of the narrative which are being put forward as necessary to be believed as literally true.

-CryptoLutheran

Unfortunately, your approach requires a casting of doubt on other biblical texts.
Calling the snake a mere snake and describing the biblical Eden account as merely a matter of eating a fruit is clearly an attack on the veracity and importance of the Genesis account via the use of scorn.

mock·er·y

(mŏk′ə-rē)

n. pl. mock·er·ies

1. Scornfully contemptuous ridicule; derision.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mockery

 

[mmksparbud]

I guess the disciples were confused, they seem to think it was literal.


Luk_3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
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.
1Ti_2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
1Ti_2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Jud_1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

 

[Radrook]

I guess the disciples were confused, they seem to think it was literal.


Luk_3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
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.
1Ti_2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
1Ti_2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Jud_1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

The disciples also explained parts that were to be taken literally as well as prophetically symbolic.

For example the Edenic snake is identified as the Devil.
Melchizedeck is identified as a prophetic type of Jesus.
The willingness of Abraham to sacrifice his son as a prophetic drama of how God would offer up his own son for our sins.
The mention of a seed in Genesis 3:15 who would crush the snake's head as a prophecy of how Jesus would destroy Satan.
The promises made to Abraham as having their fulfillment via Jesus.
Even Hagar and Sarah are used s symbols of the OT and the NT.

And there are many many more.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Rejection of the Genesis account as mere myth strikes at the very heart of Christianity for the following reasons...

Another repetitious and blatantly false "believe YEC or go to Hell" thread. I have real Christianity to do.

 

[Radrook]

Another repetitious and blatantly false "believe YEC or go to Hell" thread. I have real Christianity to do.

I'm not a YEC.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

I'm not a YEC.

I have no idea of how you self-identify. But your post is YEC script in every important aspect.

This is known as the 'duck theory'.