Detailing Biblical Creation Mythology

[SallyF]

My Sunday school teachers and Bible class instructors used to quite happily go through the details of how "God" created the universe and everything in it.

I have noticed, in more recent years, that folks who still call themselves Christian avoid discussing the details of the two biblical creation mythologies.

They will go ON and On at length about the science of evolution, but not a squeak on the details in the "Word of God".

When Christians do not discuss the details of biblical creation, why would that be …?

[Zzyzx]

.

We should interpret it to understand what is true.

Agree

If it is some kind of parable, we should interpret it as such.

Does that apply only to those parts that are self-identified as parables?

If it is literal, we should interpret it as such.

How are literal parts identified (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

If it is historical, if it is mythological,

How are historical or mythological parts identified (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

or if it is down right lies, of false assertions, we should interpret it as such.

How are lies and false assertions identified (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

Likewise, if it is inspired by God, it should be interpreted as such,

How can it be known and show which parts are ‘inspired by God’ (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

in which case id point to Jesus as the Christ as the cornerstone of evidence.

Are the words attributed to Jesus actually his words? Who recorded what he said? The Gospels were written decades after Jesus is said to have died – and written by people whose identity is unknown to or disputed by Christian scholars and theologians.

Can we be SURE the Gospel writers accurately recorded his exact words? If they cannot be shown to be his exact words, whose words are they?

Id like to point out, there is two kinds of people who interpret this stuff strictly as literal, some very hard-lined fundamental Christians, and atheists... In fact, atheists take it to an all kind of extreme, even further then the fundamentals...

Some of us Non-Theists challenge claims made by Christians regarding knowing exact words spoken by someone 2000 years ago for which we have no direct records and not even any accounts until decades after the words were supposedly spoken.

Note: We cannot be certain of the exact words used by Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address. There are at least five different versions attributed to Lincoln himself (and that was only 156 years ago).

Some of us also challenge those who pretend to know what parts of the Bible are parable, historical, mythological, or false to present a MEANS to make that distinction that can be used by anyone interested to make the determination (independent of opinion and guesswork).

[Tart]

.

We should interpret it to understand what is true.

Agree

If it is some kind of parable, we should interpret it as such.

Does that apply only to those parts that are self-identified as parables?

If it is literal, we should interpret it as such.

How are literal parts identified (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

If it is historical, if it is mythological,

How are historical or mythological parts identified (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

or if it is down right lies, of false assertions, we should interpret it as such.

How are lies and false assertions identified (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

Likewise, if it is inspired by God, it should be interpreted as such,

How can it be known and show which parts are ‘inspired by God’ (a means more reliable than opinion or guesswork)?

in which case id point to Jesus as the Christ as the cornerstone of evidence.

Are the words attributed to Jesus actually his words? Who recorded what he said? The Gospels were written decades after Jesus is said to have died – and written by people whose identity is unknown to or disputed by Christian scholars and theologians.

Can we be SURE the Gospel writers accurately recorded his exact words? If they cannot be shown to be his exact words, whose words are they?

Id like to point out, there is two kinds of people who interpret this stuff strictly as literal, some very hard-lined fundamental Christians, and atheists... In fact, atheists take it to an all kind of extreme, even further then the fundamentals...

Some of us Non-Theists challenge claims made by Christians regarding knowing exact words spoken by someone 2000 years ago for which we have no direct records and not even any accounts until decades after the words were supposedly spoken.

Note: We cannot be certain of the exact words used by Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address. There are at least five different versions attributed to Lincoln himself (and that was only 156 years ago).

Some of us also challenge those who pretend to know what parts of the Bible are parable, historical, mythological, or false to present a MEANS to make that distinction that can be used by anyone interested to make the determination (independent of opinion and guesswork).

Ok, well I suppose we should do it with our best means, reasoning, and knowledge available... Are you suggestion that we shouldn't even attempt to interpret it, and just throw it away?

[Zzyzx]

.

Ok, well I suppose we should do it with our best means, reasoning, and knowledge available...

In other words there is NO means to distinguish – and it is a matter of opinion. Right?

Are you suggestion that we shouldn't even attempt to interpret it, and just throw it away?

I suggest that we not pretend or claim to know what parts of the Bible are parable, historical, mythological, false, or literally true – and not pretend or claim to know exact words spoken by Jesus – unless and until we can set forth a reliable means to make the determination (more than opinion).

[Tart]

.

Ok, well I suppose we should do it with our best means, reasoning, and knowledge available...

In other words there is NO means to distinguish – and it is a matter of opinion. Right?

Are you suggestion that we shouldn't even attempt to interpret it, and just throw it away?

I suggest that we not pretend or claim to know what parts of the Bible are parable, historical, mythological, false, or literally true – and not pretend or claim to know exact words spoken by Jesus – unless and until we can set forth a reliable means to make the determination (more than opinion).

Ok, well in this discussion, it seems that the people who are claiming to know the exact interpretation is a few atheists insisting on their own interpretation... So maybe you should take up your beef with them..

If you see me making a claim to know something, that I shouldn't be making, id encourage you to point it out and we can discuss such statements....

The fact of the matter is, someone wrote these books, and they may have wrote them in any matter suggested (parables, myths, lies, history, etc...)… We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.

[Tcg]

We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.

Why should we agree to this?

What do you mean by, "objective truth?"

Why should we expect to find it in scripture?


Tcg

[Tart]

We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.

Why should we agree to this?

What do you mean by, "objective truth?"

Why should we expect to find it in scripture?


Tcg

When I say that, in this case I am referring to some kind of truth in which these words were written in... For example, even if it was a lie, it would be objectively true that the author wrote the words lying... If it is fiction that the author created, we should interpret it that way. It would be objectively true to say it was a work of fiction...

That is what I mean by saying we should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be working to make sense of... I say this as a response to Z's statement that we can not interpret the Bible past anyone's own opinion.

[Tcg]

We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.

Why should we agree to this?

What do you mean by, "objective truth?"

Why should we expect to find it in scripture?


Tcg

When I say that, in this case I am referring to some kind of truth in which these words were written in... For example, even if it was a lie, it would be objectively true that the author wrote the words lying... If it is fiction that the author created, we should interpret it that way. It would be objectively true to say it was a work of fiction...

That is what I mean by we should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be working to make sense of... I say this as a response to Z's statement that we can not interpret the Bible past anyone's own opinion.

I can agree with this given this explanation of "objective truth." The question we are left with then is how do we gain this understanding and in light the topic of this thread, how do we make these determinations about the biblical creation story specifically?


Tcg

[Zzyzx]

.

Ok, well in this discussion, it seems that the people who are claiming to know the exact interpretation is a few atheists insisting on their own interpretation... So maybe you should take up your beef with them..

Do Christians know (or claim to know) which parts of the Bible are parable, historical, mythological, false, or literally true – and to know exact words spoken by Jesus? Do you?

It seems as though many are convinced they know. Do you know how to tell? If so, kindly enlighten all of us so we can agree – and not make mistakes about what should be taken literally.

We wouldn’t want those Atheists making more mistakes so tell them how to distinguish literal from non literal.

If you see me making a claim to know something, that I shouldn't be making, id encourage you to point it out and we can discuss such statements.…

Is the biblical story about resurrection literally true or is it parable, folklore, mythological, or false?

The fact of the matter is, someone wrote these books,

Agree, though we cannot say with certainty who wrote them.

and they may have wrote them in any matter suggested (parables, myths, lies, history, etc...)…

Agree. Some of the stories may be literally true. Which ones? And, how can we determine which are literally true and which are not?

We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.

I, for one, would like to know if scripture should be interpreted to indicate that the resurrection story is ‘objective truth’ (truth conditions are met without bias caused by feelings, ideas, opinions, etc.).

Perhaps you can identify a means to determine if the story is literal truth or not.


Edited to add: change 'resurrection story' to 'creation story' above

[Tart]

We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.

Why should we agree to this?

What do you mean by, "objective truth?"

Why should we expect to find it in scripture?


Tcg

When I say that, in this case I am referring to some kind of truth in which these words were written in... For example, even if it was a lie, it would be objectively true that the author wrote the words lying... If it is fiction that the author created, we should interpret it that way. It would be objectively true to say it was a work of fiction...

That is what I mean by we should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be working to make sense of... I say this as a response to Z's statement that we can not interpret the Bible past anyone's own opinion.

I can agree with this given this explanation of "objective truth." The question we are left with then is how do we gain this understanding and in light the topic of this thread, how do we make these determinations about the biblical creation story specifically?


Tcg

honestly... id just say anyway possible to establish the truth...

[Tcg]

We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.

Why should we agree to this?

What do you mean by, "objective truth?"

Why should we expect to find it in scripture?


Tcg

When I say that, in this case I am referring to some kind of truth in which these words were written in... For example, even if it was a lie, it would be objectively true that the author wrote the words lying... If it is fiction that the author created, we should interpret it that way. It would be objectively true to say it was a work of fiction...

That is what I mean by we should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be working to make sense of... I say this as a response to Z's statement that we can not interpret the Bible past anyone's own opinion.

I can agree with this given this explanation of "objective truth." The question we are left with then is how do we gain this understanding and in light the topic of this thread, how do we make these determinations about the biblical creation story specifically?


Tcg

honestly... id just say anyway possible to establish the truth...

That's rather vague. Can you give an example of one of the possible ways to establish the truth?


Tcg