How do we know Genesis was intended to be a metaphor?

[Justin108]

Other than our current understanding of science clearly contradicting Genesis, what reason is there to believe Genesis was written as a metaphorical account of creation?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 60 by JehovahsWitness]

Enlighten us please and also explain why God apparently can't teach humans how the creation event happened without them being knowledgeable in Hebrew first.

[JehovahsWitness]

explain why God apparently can't teach humans how the creation event happened without them being knowledgeable in Hebrew first.

One cannot teach effectively unless one's pupil understands the language you are teaching them in. If the teachers words cannot be understood then (perhaps because of a language barrior) then the best of teaching is utterly useless. If God originally communicated His "teachings" in ancient Hebrew to people that spoke the Hebrew language, that seem perfectly reasonable to me.

Do people have to speak the original language in order to learn about God and Creation? No. If the bible is the word of God it seems as if he has allowed those original words to be translated. Many translators take that task seriously, some even viewing it as "God's work" or a holy (or sacred) endeavor. Thanks to such men and women people of all languages can read all or part of the bible and can thus benefit from Divine teaching. All bible readers are to an extend trusting the integrity of bible translators.

Why then refer to the original Hebrew when discussing certain topics? Any fundamental bible truth can be learnt using any translation in any language. However no translation is perfect because languages vary greatly in structure and vocabulary. Further all translations are not equal, and quality and faithfulness to the orginal text varies. Thus certain details may be "lost in translation" and benefit from knowing the word in Hebrew.

An example is the case when discussing what happened on the fourth creative day.



Further reading
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2015922

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 54 by JehovahsWitness]

Here is the Hebrew word in question and all possible context. I trust the readers will be able to understand.


#6213a.
"
asah (793c); a prim. root; do, make:"
NASB - accomplish(8), accomplish much(1), accomplished(4), accomplishing(1), achieve(1), acquired(6), act(22), acted(12), acts(7), administer(1), administered(1), administered*(1), apply(1), appointed(3), artificial(1), attain(1), bear(4), bearing(2), behave(1), bestowed(1), bring(4), bring it about(1), bring about(1), bring forth(1), brought(1), brought about(4), brought forth(1), build*(1), built(3), busy(1), cared(1), carefully(3), carefully observing(1), carried(3), carries(2), carry(8), carved(5), cause(3), causing(1), celebrate(19), celebrated(12), celebrates(1), certainly carry(1), certainly make(1), certainly makes(1), certainly perform(2), commit(8), commits(7), commits and does(1), committed(35), committed and practices(1), committing(6), construct(3), deal(30), deals(1), dealt(22), desisting(1), destroy*(2), developing(1), did(310), did not do(1), displease*(1), do(479), do as has been done(1), do as i have done(1), doer(1), doers(1), does(48), doing(63), done(327), done you will do(1), done*(1), earns(1), established(1), establishes(1), evildoer*(2), evildoers*(1), execute(24), executed(10), executes(5), executing(1), exercise(1), exercises(1), exerted(1), fared(1), fashions(1), fit(1), follow(1), followed(1), fulfill(1), fulfilling(1), gather(1), gave(4), give you over(1), grant(1), granted(1), greedily(1), happen(1), happened(1), held(2), help(1), hold(1), imitate(1), imparted(1), inclines(1), indeed perform(1), industrious*(1), inflict(1), inflicted(1), inlaid(1), instituted(2), introduced(2), keep(1), kept(1), labored(1), laborers(1), made(369), maintain(6), maintained(1), make(200), make your ready(1), Maker(13), maker(4), makes(19), making(5), obey(1), observe(33), observe them carefully(1), observe to do(2), observe carefully(2), observed(12), observes(5), offer(35), offered(4), offering(1), oppressed*(1), ordained(1), perform(31), performed(23), performers(1), performing(2), performing the made(1), performs(3), practice(9), practice*(1), practiced(4), practices(6), practicing(1), prepare(26), prepared(19), preparing(2), present(5), presented(1), produce(4), produced(5), provide(13), provided(2), provides(1), punish(1), put(1), put into effect(1), put forth(1), ready(1), reign*(1), remade*(1), responsible(1), sacrifice(2), set(3), set*(1), show(16), showed(6), showing(2), shown(9), shows(3), spend(1), surely show(1), take action(6), thoroughly deal(1), treat(3), tried(1), trim(1), trimmed(1), truly practice(1), use(1), used(4), wage(2), waged(2), work(12), worked(7), worker(2), working(3), workmen*(5), works(6), woven(1), writing(1), wrought(2), yield(5), yielded(1), yields(1).
#6213b.
"
asah (796b); a prim. root; to press, squeeze:"
NASB - handled(3).

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 63 by DanieltheDragon]

Thank you.

And the word that is NOT in Genesis 1: 14-16 is "Bara"

Bara appears in Genesis 1:1.

JW

[DanieltheDragon]

What Gen 1:3 refers to is clearly an ignorant understanding of astronomy and how the sun functions as our primary light source.

On what do you base that? Why can't it be the statement of a concept and simply a differentiation between that which is light and that which is dark?

because the differentiation spelled out in Gen 1 is the light will be called day and the dark will be called night. The night and day function of our planet is a result of the sun. This concept does not appear to correlate in the Hebrew scripture as a bit further down. God creates the sun to rule over the prexisiting daylight. Day in Genesis functions separate from the sun. It is its own light.


This makes sense from a primitive standpoint where you look up at the sky and its bright blue and there is this white shiny thing that "rises" and "falls" with the bright blue sky. They didn't have satellites telescopes etc.

No, the day and night of our planet is a function of the earth's rotation on an axis relatively perpendicular to the sun, but you are reading a lot into a few verses. The concept of day and night need not be limited to our planet. On Uranus you are more correct. The day and night intervals are primarily a function of it's rotation around the sun. However, aren't we getting juuusssst a little ahead of ourselves here. Why would we expect the seminal sentences regarding the nature of the universe to include this much detail and in that form. Shouldn't we expect it to first state things conceptually and then apply them to specifics?

It appears to me that you are choosing to presume that the concept of yom to be limited to sunlight at the outset and thus the viewing of the sun separately as a function of primitive intellect. Could it be that these "sheepherders" realized that maybe the greater light had something to do with heat and light, but that beyond that it was not really relevant to their day to day lives. Oh yes, by the way(10 sentences later) it also correlates with the times and the seasons.

By the way, how have those unmentioned details been useful to you in your life today?

I simply said it was a function as a result of the sun. I did not give specifics, without the sun it doesn't matter how much the earth is spinning there is no day and night. I did not talk about rotation around the sun either so your Uranus point is moot.

No need to mention how it is useful as that wasn't the question asked nor statement made we can discuss that in the science and religion section if you wish.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 63 by DanieltheDragon]

Thank you.

And the word that is NOT in Genesis 1: 14-16 is "Bara"

Bara appears in Genesis 1:1.

JW

Who are you quoting?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 66 by DanieltheDragon]

Myself.

[TheBeardedDude]

The Genesis account gets the origin of humans wrong, we don't descend from dirt for instance but from the Great Apes.

The bible doesn't say we "descended" from dirt, it indicates we descended from humans. This is completely in line with Mendels laws of genetics.

What the bible indicates is that the human body was made out of previously existing elements found in the ground/the earth which is scientifically sound.

JW

No, what the bible says is that god made man from dust. The bible says you descend from dirt. Which is in no way scientifically sound.

[JehovahsWitness]

The bible says you descend from dirt. Which is in no way scientifically sound.

The words in the bible are that god formed the first man "from the dust of the ground". It then goes on to speak of man and his woman procreating and children being born to them. Thus the implication is that humans descended from other humans but that the human body is made made from elements that can also be found in the ground.

Both of the above facts (that humans descend from other humans; that the human body contains elements found in the ground) are proven scientific truths.

JW

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness]

Well make and create are still synonyms even in Hebrew. What's your point?

Please explain what you believe happens on the fourth day that no one else understands.