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 ?
Detailing Biblical Creation Mythology
Moderator: Moderators
-
Tcg
- Savant
- Posts: 8728
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
- Location: Third Stone
- Has thanked: 2279 times
- Been thanked: 2408 times
Re: Detailing Biblical Creation Mythology
Post #61[Replying to post 60 by SallyF]
We've been warned not to interpret these creation stories literally, even to the point of being accused of dishonesty if we do so.
We ask for some standard we can use to determine how the original authors meant them to be taken.
So far in this thread, we have not been given one.
At this point then, there is no way to say that a literal approach is any less valid than any other. It may or may not be how the authors intended them to be understood, but with out an objective standard, no one can claim to be taking the only proper approach or accuse others of taking a wrong approach.
Given how often a literal approach is said to be improper, I surely expected to learn of the standard used in that determination. At a minimum, I'd hope to find out the meaning of these stories if a literal one is rejected.
Tcg
We've been warned not to interpret these creation stories literally, even to the point of being accused of dishonesty if we do so.
We ask for some standard we can use to determine how the original authors meant them to be taken.
So far in this thread, we have not been given one.
At this point then, there is no way to say that a literal approach is any less valid than any other. It may or may not be how the authors intended them to be understood, but with out an objective standard, no one can claim to be taking the only proper approach or accuse others of taking a wrong approach.
Given how often a literal approach is said to be improper, I surely expected to learn of the standard used in that determination. At a minimum, I'd hope to find out the meaning of these stories if a literal one is rejected.
Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
-
Tcg
- Savant
- Posts: 8728
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
- Location: Third Stone
- Has thanked: 2279 times
- Been thanked: 2408 times
Post #63
You stated this previously:Tart wrote: I don't even believe there needs to be some set of standards to attempt to interpret the evidence to the best of our ability...
Now, rather than seeking, "some kind of objective truth", the goal has become to simply, "attempt to interpret the evidence to the best of our ability."Tart wrote:
We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.
If one's goal is objective truth, an objective standard is needed. Lesser goals wouldn't require it.
Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
Post #64
Tcg wrote:You stated this previously:Tart wrote: I don't even believe there needs to be some set of standards to attempt to interpret the evidence to the best of our ability...
Now, rather than seeking, "some kind of objective truth", the goal has become to simply, "attempt to interpret the evidence to the best of our ability."Tart wrote:
We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.
If one's goal is objective truth, an objective standard is needed. Lesser goals wouldn't require it.
Tcg
We have both agreed that there needs to be some kind of objective truth of how these stories came into existence, but I still stand by my words that I don't believe there needs to be some objective standard for determining so. If there was some good standard that was in place then id agree with it but I don't even know if there is any standards for this subject anywhere. And apparently you don't even have any standards yourself, nor do you even attempt in answering your own question that you say I have to answer... Kind of a double standard... isn't it?
If you wish not to participate in reasoning with evidence because you need some kind of laws to do so, that is your own choice.
-
Tcg
- Savant
- Posts: 8728
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
- Location: Third Stone
- Has thanked: 2279 times
- Been thanked: 2408 times
Post #65
No, I agreed that there is an objective truth concerning how the original authors intended these tales to be taken. So far, no attempt has been made to explain how we can determine what that objective truth is. Merely noting that there is some objective truth concerning their intentions is meaningless if we have no objective method to determine what those intentions were.Tart wrote:Tcg wrote:You stated this previously:Tart wrote: I don't even believe there needs to be some set of standards to attempt to interpret the evidence to the best of our ability...
Now, rather than seeking, "some kind of objective truth", the goal has become to simply, "attempt to interpret the evidence to the best of our ability."Tart wrote:
We should agree there is some kind of objective truth that we should be trying to get to, when interpreting scripture.
If one's goal is objective truth, an objective standard is needed. Lesser goals wouldn't require it.
Tcg
We have both agreed that there needs to be some kind of objective truth of how these stories came into existence,
This is as helpful as saying that there is some objective truth concerning JFK's assassination. Of course there is, but stating this fact does nothing to help determine what it is.
How can objective truth be determined without an objective standard?
but I still stand by my words that I don't believe there needs to be some objective standard for determining so. If there was some good standard that was in place then id agree with it but I don't even know if there is any standards for this subject anywhere.
If I knew of a standard, I'd share it. Are you suggesting it is wrong of me to seek assistance from other posters? Some on this forum are very confident that the authors did not intend these stories literally. Given that, it seems reasonable to expect someone to have an objective standard used to support their confidence.
And apparently you don't even have any standards yourself, nor do you even attempt in answering your own question that you say I have to answer... Kind of a double standard... isn't it?
As you see, I am participating in this discussion. Yes, that is my own choice, no one is forcing me to do so.
If you wish not to participate in reasoning with evidence because you need some kind of laws to do so, that is your own choice.
Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
-
rondonmonson
- Student
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:59 pm
Re: Detailing Biblical Creation Mythology
Post #66[Replying to post 1 by SallyF]
Hello all, first time poster, new to the forum. I enjoy debating with those I disagree with as it moves my mind to think in the abstract or in ways others might not tend to go forth in. After all, as a Christian of 33 years I want to know all the pertinent facts of life. Most people don't even come close to "getting" the creation story of Genesis right, only God was there, so we get His version of creation, relayed in a manner most men can't understand.I attempted to lay out what I see as the facts via much study about three years ago. Many, many Christians find this hard to comprehend, many Atheists like to deny my logical thinking here. Maybe that's why they both tend to argue so much, which is not my bag per se. I will point/counter point. But my desire is to lead people unto truths as they are, not as they appear to be.
I as a 30 year Christian try to think outside the box of normality. Is the universe 6000 years old? Is the universe 13.7 billion years old? Do these two questions clash or is there a translation barrier !! This is how I think. I try to bring both poles of thought towards each other starting with the facts. We know the universe has to be over 6000 years old because we see light from stars that are millions of light years away, so we would have to be naive to think the universe is 6000 years old.
Onward to what Genesis says about creation, does it really say the universe or earth is 6000 years old? I dont think it does, I think its a mistranslation of a primitive language that had only around 4000 words at the time Genesis was written, whereas the English language has 500,000 words. So many of the Hebrew words were used in multiple ways. For instance the original meaning of the Hebrew word YOWM (Day) means to be hot and there are at least 50 other meanings listed in strongs concordances lexicon of Hebrew words. A year, a month, a period of time, chronicles, evening and morning (Beginning and end), age, perpetually, long, some time, whole, X required season, continually etc. etc., well you get the point.
YOWM or To be hot, what would this mean and why was it used since God is supposed to have given Moses the first five books of the Torah. Well when the universe was spoken into existence by God, it took 400 million years for the first stars to form. So the first Day (to be hot) was the Evening (Darkness, 400 million years of darkness) and the Morning ( The stars started forming) and the first day was a period of time and in my opinion it lasted from 13.7 Billion BC until 4.5 Billion BC (9.2 Billion years) when the Sun & Earth were formed. So lets take a second and look at the Bible and the WMAP research and see if this matches.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Now look below at the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) which launched in 2001 and won many awards, they mapped the whole universe out. Below as we see, you had Quantum Fluctuations which I contend is God, then you had Inflation, followed by afterglow, followed by 400 MILLION YEARS of Darkness !! Just like the bible says in verse 2, and there was Darkness on the Face of the Deep !! Gods word is perfect, it is us who are confused. DARK AGES Mapped out by the WMAP, followed by what? The first stars forming at the 400 million year mark. Verse three says what? and God said Let there be light God is right again. We are looking at Creation from Gods POV, no man was there of course and with God he is not subject to time, he created time for us via this universe, but He is eternal and thus was never created. Remember the verse, a thousand years is like a day and a day like unto a thousand years unto God. In other words God lives in the past, present and future all at the same time.
IN MY BLOG AN IMAGE OF THE Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) is placed here, to follow along you might have to google it to see my points of emphasis as per the "Darkness being on the face of the Deep" for 400 million years.
So we had the Big Bang, followed by Inflation, followed by Cosmic Microwave background where after 375,000 years loose electrons cool enough to combine with protons. The Universe becomes transparent to light. The microwave background begins to shine. Then the dark ages/clouds of dark hydrogen gas cool and coalesce.
The first stars appear; Gas Clouds collapse, the fusion of stars begin, the first of which appears at about 400 million years after the big bang. So, when the bible says Darkness was on the face of the deep, God knew exactly what was happening in the very beginning !! The more we look for the answers, the more that science and the bible will converge, if both sides with differing viewpoints would only take their blinders off.
The second day (period of time) of course would be from the Earth & the Suns formation until the grasses and trees came forth on the Third day (period of time) then on the Fourth day it seems God Set the Seasons or placed the moon in its perfect orbit where our seasons are not strange, but orderly, I know the moon and earth is supposed to have collided. Anyway, that set the seasons, times, years etc. etc. Mind you, all of these ideas are rudimentary observations. A theory of how the things God says in His Holy Word and science can both be factual. They are not meant to imply everything went down just so and so and in like manner, the dates of course are guesstimates, I wasnt there.
On the Fifth day God created the Sea animals/birds and what not, were the Dinos created here or with the land animals? The fifth day lasted 300 million to 400 million years or so. On the Sixth Day around 300"350 Million BC God created the Land Animals. During this period of time the Dinosaurs became extinct about 70 Million years ago. Then during this TIME PERIOD (6TH DAY) God decided to create man 6000 or so years ago. Some people might protest that men have been around much longer, but I offer this up, where is the data? Men are record keepers and we dont have proof of men going back further. Now as per MEN being observed by scientists to have been around X Number of years, I never said animal like men werent around, I stated Human Beings were created 6000 years ago, when God placed His spirit in us and thus we became immortal in that our souls can not die. We were, at that point in time Created in Gods Image. The other fossils and bones mean nothing, because scientists have no way of testing for God imparting His spirit into mankind and creating Human Beings with powerful intellects.
On the Seventh Day God rested, which only means He ceased Creating the Heavens/Earth/Mankind/Animals. So when we see stars and galaxies created today, it was ordered forth 13.7 Billion years ago. So its not necessarily either or. We need to start looking at things with an open mind, be we an atheist or a Christian.
P.S. Just something to think about. Einsteins theory of relativity is in the very first verse of the bible, relatively speakingLOL.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning (TIME) God created the heaven(SPACE) and the earth(MATTER).
INCOMING EXPECTED.........LOL. Its all good, I am a big boy.
Hello all, first time poster, new to the forum. I enjoy debating with those I disagree with as it moves my mind to think in the abstract or in ways others might not tend to go forth in. After all, as a Christian of 33 years I want to know all the pertinent facts of life. Most people don't even come close to "getting" the creation story of Genesis right, only God was there, so we get His version of creation, relayed in a manner most men can't understand.I attempted to lay out what I see as the facts via much study about three years ago. Many, many Christians find this hard to comprehend, many Atheists like to deny my logical thinking here. Maybe that's why they both tend to argue so much, which is not my bag per se. I will point/counter point. But my desire is to lead people unto truths as they are, not as they appear to be.
I as a 30 year Christian try to think outside the box of normality. Is the universe 6000 years old? Is the universe 13.7 billion years old? Do these two questions clash or is there a translation barrier !! This is how I think. I try to bring both poles of thought towards each other starting with the facts. We know the universe has to be over 6000 years old because we see light from stars that are millions of light years away, so we would have to be naive to think the universe is 6000 years old.
Onward to what Genesis says about creation, does it really say the universe or earth is 6000 years old? I dont think it does, I think its a mistranslation of a primitive language that had only around 4000 words at the time Genesis was written, whereas the English language has 500,000 words. So many of the Hebrew words were used in multiple ways. For instance the original meaning of the Hebrew word YOWM (Day) means to be hot and there are at least 50 other meanings listed in strongs concordances lexicon of Hebrew words. A year, a month, a period of time, chronicles, evening and morning (Beginning and end), age, perpetually, long, some time, whole, X required season, continually etc. etc., well you get the point.
YOWM or To be hot, what would this mean and why was it used since God is supposed to have given Moses the first five books of the Torah. Well when the universe was spoken into existence by God, it took 400 million years for the first stars to form. So the first Day (to be hot) was the Evening (Darkness, 400 million years of darkness) and the Morning ( The stars started forming) and the first day was a period of time and in my opinion it lasted from 13.7 Billion BC until 4.5 Billion BC (9.2 Billion years) when the Sun & Earth were formed. So lets take a second and look at the Bible and the WMAP research and see if this matches.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Now look below at the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) which launched in 2001 and won many awards, they mapped the whole universe out. Below as we see, you had Quantum Fluctuations which I contend is God, then you had Inflation, followed by afterglow, followed by 400 MILLION YEARS of Darkness !! Just like the bible says in verse 2, and there was Darkness on the Face of the Deep !! Gods word is perfect, it is us who are confused. DARK AGES Mapped out by the WMAP, followed by what? The first stars forming at the 400 million year mark. Verse three says what? and God said Let there be light God is right again. We are looking at Creation from Gods POV, no man was there of course and with God he is not subject to time, he created time for us via this universe, but He is eternal and thus was never created. Remember the verse, a thousand years is like a day and a day like unto a thousand years unto God. In other words God lives in the past, present and future all at the same time.
IN MY BLOG AN IMAGE OF THE Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) is placed here, to follow along you might have to google it to see my points of emphasis as per the "Darkness being on the face of the Deep" for 400 million years.
So we had the Big Bang, followed by Inflation, followed by Cosmic Microwave background where after 375,000 years loose electrons cool enough to combine with protons. The Universe becomes transparent to light. The microwave background begins to shine. Then the dark ages/clouds of dark hydrogen gas cool and coalesce.
The first stars appear; Gas Clouds collapse, the fusion of stars begin, the first of which appears at about 400 million years after the big bang. So, when the bible says Darkness was on the face of the deep, God knew exactly what was happening in the very beginning !! The more we look for the answers, the more that science and the bible will converge, if both sides with differing viewpoints would only take their blinders off.
The second day (period of time) of course would be from the Earth & the Suns formation until the grasses and trees came forth on the Third day (period of time) then on the Fourth day it seems God Set the Seasons or placed the moon in its perfect orbit where our seasons are not strange, but orderly, I know the moon and earth is supposed to have collided. Anyway, that set the seasons, times, years etc. etc. Mind you, all of these ideas are rudimentary observations. A theory of how the things God says in His Holy Word and science can both be factual. They are not meant to imply everything went down just so and so and in like manner, the dates of course are guesstimates, I wasnt there.
On the Fifth day God created the Sea animals/birds and what not, were the Dinos created here or with the land animals? The fifth day lasted 300 million to 400 million years or so. On the Sixth Day around 300"350 Million BC God created the Land Animals. During this period of time the Dinosaurs became extinct about 70 Million years ago. Then during this TIME PERIOD (6TH DAY) God decided to create man 6000 or so years ago. Some people might protest that men have been around much longer, but I offer this up, where is the data? Men are record keepers and we dont have proof of men going back further. Now as per MEN being observed by scientists to have been around X Number of years, I never said animal like men werent around, I stated Human Beings were created 6000 years ago, when God placed His spirit in us and thus we became immortal in that our souls can not die. We were, at that point in time Created in Gods Image. The other fossils and bones mean nothing, because scientists have no way of testing for God imparting His spirit into mankind and creating Human Beings with powerful intellects.
On the Seventh Day God rested, which only means He ceased Creating the Heavens/Earth/Mankind/Animals. So when we see stars and galaxies created today, it was ordered forth 13.7 Billion years ago. So its not necessarily either or. We need to start looking at things with an open mind, be we an atheist or a Christian.
P.S. Just something to think about. Einsteins theory of relativity is in the very first verse of the bible, relatively speakingLOL.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning (TIME) God created the heaven(SPACE) and the earth(MATTER).
INCOMING EXPECTED.........LOL. Its all good, I am a big boy.
-
benchwarmer
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2511
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 2347 times
- Been thanked: 962 times
Re: Detailing Biblical Creation Mythology
Post #67First, welcome rondonmonson!rondonmonson wrote: So lets take a second and look at the Bible and the WMAP research and see if this matches.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
I notice your examination skipped right on past "upon the face of the waters". Has any of the data so far shown that water existed before light?
Ya, asbestos underwear is pretty much a prerequisite around here. Duck and cover my friendrondonmonson wrote: INCOMING EXPECTED.........LOL. Its all good, I am a big boy.
-
Danmark
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 12697
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
- Location: Seattle
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #68
Your two statements quoted above appear to directly contradict each other. If there IS an objective truth about these 'stories' than why not have an epistemology for determining that truth.Tart wrote: We have both agreed that there needs to be some kind of objective truth of how these stories came into existence, but I still stand by my words that I don't believe there needs to be some objective standard for determining so.
You might as well abandon the search for truth altogether if you claim there is no way to find that truth. What makes stories of creation an exception to the idea of searching for objective truth? We use objectivity and empiricism to find answers to other questions about reality. When a creation story appears to contradict everything we know about nature, logic, and common sense AND has been borrowed from earlier cultures why shouldn't we conclude it comes from men who did not have a clear understanding of those laws of nature? Why leap to the wildest explanation possible, that some unknown god defied his own laws and created the universe by magic?
The problem with abandoning a tried and true method of determining truth, and considering subjective tradition, a tradition with an unknown origin, is that that approach allows us to believe anything, no matter how absurd - things like talking asses and snakes, ogres, witches on brooms, and the Earth's abrupt stopping from rotating on its axis.
Post #69
Moderator Comment
Welcome to the forum. You will find many of the posters here think outside the box in their private time and when posting here they address the question posed in the opening post. If you have interesting theories that seem to marry Genesis with Einstein's work, then include them in a succinct way where and if they have relevance. Though some of us have experience with students, we try to avoid preaching or lecturing. I'm sure as you grow accustomed to the format you will have many interesting points to make. I wish you well.
Please review the Rules.
______________
Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
-
JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 23310
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 925 times
- Been thanked: 1348 times
- Contact:
Re: Detailing Biblical Creation Mythology
Post #70rondonmonson wrote:
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning (TIME) God created the heaven(SPACE) and the earth(MATTER)
I like that, yes the opening line of the bible is supported by the current scientific concensus, namely that that the universe did indeed have a beginning. That said the OP asks about biblical mythology so since this refers to scientifically supported biblical reality, it strictly speaking doesn't belong in this thread.
Maybe you might be interesting in contributing to the thread below that I posted in?
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
