Does Genesis 1 describe the Universe?

[Tcg]

Some claim that Genesis 1 describes the creation of the universe and yet an examination of the text reveals that the author doesn't have any concept of planets other than the earth. Beyond that, the author doesn't even understand that the earth is a planet. This is an example of Ancient Hebrew concept of cosmology:




Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?


Tcg

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Tcg in post #1]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Because it fits their need. There's really no other reason that would make sense. But I'm sure a believer will preform linguistic gymnastics to make it 'show' it's talking about 'the universe' and 'planets' and the like. After all, the world is less than 10K years old

[Tcg]

[Replying to Tcg in post #1]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Because it fits their need. There's really no other reason that would make sense. But I'm sure a believer will preform linguistic gymnastics to make it 'show' it's talking about 'the universe' and 'planets' and the like. After all, the world is less than 10K years old

Bishop Ussher dates the creation of the world to Sunday 23 October 4004 BC. That gives us about 6,000 years. Of course that reveals yet another misunderstanding of cosmology.


Tcg

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Tcg in post #1]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Because it fits their need. There's really no other reason that would make sense. But I'm sure a believer will preform linguistic gymnastics to make it 'show' it's talking about 'the universe' and 'planets' and the like. After all, the world is less than 10K years old

Bishop Ussher dates the creation of the world to Sunday 23 October 4004 BC. That gives us about 6,000 years. Of course that reveals yet another misunderstanding of cosmology.


Tcg

Oh Bisshy Ussher.... What a crack up!
These people can't even all agree on their own religion so why people want to think them experts at other things is a mystery, really. But hey: if it make someone sleep better at night I guess that's all that matters...?

[Tcg]

[Replying to Tcg in post #1]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Because it fits their need. There's really no other reason that would make sense. But I'm sure a believer will preform linguistic gymnastics to make it 'show' it's talking about 'the universe' and 'planets' and the like. After all, the world is less than 10K years old

Bishop Ussher dates the creation of the world to Sunday 23 October 4004 BC. That gives us about 6,000 years. Of course that reveals yet another misunderstanding of cosmology.


Tcg

Oh Bisshy Ussher.... What a crack up!
These people can't even all agree on their own religion so why people want to think them experts at other things is a mystery, really. But hey: if it make someone sleep better at night I guess that's all that matters...?

Yes. He begat so and so and then so and so begat so and so. If we add it all up, walla, 4004 BC.


Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Tcg in post #1]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Because it fits their need. There's really no other reason that would make sense. But I'm sure a believer will preform linguistic gymnastics to make it 'show' it's talking about 'the universe' and 'planets' and the like. After all, the world is less than 10K years old

Bishop Ussher dates the creation of the world to Sunday 23 October 4004 BC. That gives us about 6,000 years. Of course that reveals yet another misunderstanding of cosmology.


Tcg

Oh Bisshy Ussher.... What a crack up!
These people can't even all agree on their own religion so why people want to think them experts at other things is a mystery, really. But hey: if it make someone sleep better at night I guess that's all that matters...?

We must understand the limits of the information at the time. He did the best with the limited information he had at the time, just as geographers did in the 14th c. or Geologists and biologists did before Darwin. No doubt in a few centuries from now (1) we (humung beans) will look back and laugh..."the poor saps had no idea" the whole thing was an alien computer - simulation. 'They coped with ASida - let's see how they cope with....This...

(1) Yes, folks, we'll be ok. I guarantee it. Sorry, no moneys back in case of non -delivery.

[Tcg]

[Replying to Tcg in post #1]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Because it fits their need. There's really no other reason that would make sense. But I'm sure a believer will preform linguistic gymnastics to make it 'show' it's talking about 'the universe' and 'planets' and the like. After all, the world is less than 10K years old

Bishop Ussher dates the creation of the world to Sunday 23 October 4004 BC. That gives us about 6,000 years. Of course that reveals yet another misunderstanding of cosmology.


Tcg

Oh Bisshy Ussher.... What a crack up!
These people can't even all agree on their own religion so why people want to think them experts at other things is a mystery, really. But hey: if it make someone sleep better at night I guess that's all that matters...?

We must understand the limits of the information at the time. He did the best with the limited information he had at the time, just as geographers did in the 14th c. or Geologists and biologists did before Darwin. No doubt in a few centuries from now (1) we (humung beans) will look back and laugh..."the poor saps had no idea" the whole thing was an alien computer - simulation. 'They coped with ASida - let's see how they cope with....This...

(1) Yes, folks, we'll be ok. I guarantee it. Sorry, no moneys back in case of non -delivery.

Oh, I agree, but if God were behind the story we'd expect a bit more accuracy. Of course if no god/s were involved, we'd expect just what we have.


Tcg

[theophile]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Tcg

I can't speak for why some people claim what they do. But just because some people claim it doesn't mean we should discredit the text if it doesn't deliver. Maybe it just wasn't of interest to the writer, known, or vital to the point being made. Maybe the claimant is wrong.

We should look at what the text says and judge accordingly. And in Genesis 1 what we see (in Genesis 1:2) is that the earth was formless and empty, and that darkness covered the face of the deep.

That's the first description we have of a starting point. And it strikes me as an image of something like Mars, should we go there today, if we wanted a real comparison. i.e., the writer is telling us that the earth was a barren wasteland unsuitable for life.

The unfolding story goes on to show how God worked to make the earth more hospitable. So it's more a story of terraforming than it is universe creation. Now granted, it is an ancient view of terraforming and surely wouldn't hold up to even our basic science on the topic. But that too is beside the point. The point (IMO) is to show the reader what kind of god God is. It is not to accurately detail out a scientific process (or the structure of the universe for that matter).

[Tcg]

Why do some claim that Genesis 1 describes the universe when the author shows no knowledge of our solar system much less the universe?

Tcg

I can't speak for why some people claim what they do. But just because some people claim it doesn't mean we should discredit the text if it doesn't deliver. Maybe it just wasn't of interest to the writer, known, or vital to the point being made. Maybe the claimant is wrong.

We should look at what the text says and judge accordingly. And in Genesis 1 what we see (in Genesis 1:2) is that the earth was formless and empty, and that darkness covered the face of the deep.

That's the first description we have of a starting point. And it strikes me as an image of something like Mars, should we go there today, if we wanted a real comparison. i.e., the writer is telling us that the earth was a barren wasteland unsuitable for life.

The unfolding story goes on to show how God worked to make the earth more hospitable. So it's more a story of terraforming than it is universe creation. Now granted, it is an ancient view of terraforming and surely wouldn't hold up to even our basic science on the topic. But that too is beside the point. The point (IMO) is to show the reader what kind of god God is. It is not to accurately detail out a scientific process (or the structure of the universe for that matter).

None of this addresses the fact that Genesis 1 does not describe the universe.


Tcg

[brunumb]

The point (IMO) is to show the reader what kind of god God is than it is to accurately detail out a scientific process.

But if it is not based on the truth it doesn't show us anything about God at all. It just shows us how early people imagined that it all began. No God necessary.