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 …?

[SallyF]

Let me post one of my favourite details from the first creation myth:

20 And Elohim said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And Elohim created great whales/leviathans/sea monsters, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and Elohim saw that it was good.

22 And Elohim blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. We all know where this is from

The Elohim were the plural concept of "God" for the Jews while the Jews were still Canaanites.

I suggest that those Christians who do not discuss these details, don't discuss them because they too recognise them as mythology.

Disinterested science informs us that fowls of the air evolved from dinosaurs.

The Bible tells us that "God" created them in the same "day" as "God" created whales.

It's mythology.

It's why certain Christians take the spotlight right off it … in my view.

[bjs]

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

While I often discuss the biblical account of a creation with other Christians, I do shy away from discussing it with atheists.

The reason for this is that I have found that the majority of non-Christians who want to debate the creation account in Genesis wildly misrepresent that account. They insist that passage must be precisely literal. They ignore context and literary style in order to create a version of the story that they find most useful for attacking beliefs they disagree with. They abandon accuracy for a perceived advantage in a debate.

I am sure that there are exceptions to this attitude among atheists, but those exceptions are rare enough that I have largely given up on the effort.

[Zzyzx]

.

The reason for this is that I have found that the majority of non-Christians who want to debate the creation account in Genesis wildly misrepresent that account. They insist that passage must be precisely literal. They ignore context and literary style in order to create a version of the story that they find most useful for attacking beliefs they disagree with. They abandon accuracy for a perceived advantage in a debate.

Okay. I, for one, am open to hearing the official REAL story of creation. The version you prefer.

I have started a thread on that very topic -- and anxiously await the information

viewtopic.php?p=982487#982487

[SallyF]

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

While I often discuss the biblical account of a creation with other Christians, I do shy away from discussing it with atheists.

The reason for this is that I have found that the majority of non-Christians who want to debate the creation account in Genesis wildly misrepresent that account. They insist that passage must be precisely literal. They ignore context and literary style in order to create a version of the story that they find most useful for attacking beliefs they disagree with. They abandon accuracy for a perceived advantage in a debate.

I am sure that there are exceptions to this attitude among atheists, but those exceptions are rare enough that I have largely given up on the effort.

This New Atheist is of the opinion that the mythographers did NOT intend a literal understanding of the text … except by the everyday folk.

More than happy to discuss the non-literal.

And please do accept that my door is WIDE OPEN to any sort of evidence that the Elohim in the first creation myth and/or Jehovah Elohim in second creation myth had ANYTHING to do with either of the "Creations", or had any influence on the (presumably) men who wrote the accounts.

I am interested to see differences and similarities in our hypotheses/beliefs with regard to the non-literal.

My hypotheses are to do with allegorised political history in the setting of familiar myth.

[Zzyzx]

.

While I often discuss the biblical account of a creation with other Christians, I do shy away from discussing it with atheists.

One way to avoid the inconvenience of encountering challenges to preconceived notions.


Some competing ancient theories and myths regarding the universe

Brahmanda (Cosmic Egg) Universe - 15th - 12th Century B.C.,
Anaxagorian Universe - The 5th Century B.C.
Atomist Universe – Late 5th Century B.C
Aristotelian Universe - the 4th Century B.C
Stoic Universe 3rd Century B.C
Heliocentric Universe - The 3rd Century B.C.
Ptolemaic Universe The 2nd Century A.D
Abrahamic Universe 6th Century A.D.

https://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/cosmological.html

[Tcg]

The reason for this is that I have found that the majority of non-Christians who want to debate the creation account in Genesis wildly misrepresent that account. They insist that passage must be precisely literal. They ignore context and literary style in order to create a version of the story that they find most useful for attacking beliefs they disagree with. They abandon accuracy for a perceived advantage in a debate.

This complaint is both inaccurate and misleading. It gives the false impression that only non-Christians insist that this passage be taken literally. This is far from the case. A number of Christians insist that the creation account is to be taken literally. There are well known parachurch organizations dedicated to pushing this approach.

Are we to assume that their motivation is nefarious as the poster here does of non-Christian's motives?

Are we to assume that they too ignore context and literary style in order to gain an advantage?

The accusations given here are presented absent any attempt to support them and they overlook the fact that some serious and dedicated Christians take the story to be literal. These accusations quite simply lack merit.

It is should come as no surprise that some non-Christians point out the problems of taking the approach that some Christians take. Christians do the same, often without being accused of any wrongdoing.


Tcg

[Tcg]

The Elohim were the plural concept of "God" for the Jews while the Jews were still Canaanites.

Thanks for this insight. The reasoning that the plural was used as a reference to the trinity doesn't add up.

One more piece of the puzzle in place!


Tcg

[Tart]

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 …?

Personally, as a Christian, i am utterly fascinated by how the Bible came to be.. What is the reasonable thing to conclude about how its stories came into existence?


Personally I think it is very clear that the Hebrews kept detailed documents about the lineage of their family trees, and it is reasonable to believe that it goes (at least) back to King David, the House of David...


But what is historical in the Bible? It is clear that Israel had documentation of its history, at least to some extent. It's wars, its laws, its linage....

But even "Hebrew" the language, came as a Semitic language, perhaps some time in the second millennium BC... So the story of Adam and Eve would have happened BEFORE the language was invented... And i find it interesting that these languages came into existence, around the same time the Bible tells the story of the Tower of Babel... Could the story have some kind of historical value? Even if it being a parable in some ways?

And it is clear that, for example, Genesis 10 has some kind of historical value to it, in this chapter they list the nations around the world. So there must have been some kind of knowledge of the nations around the world at this point in the story (right after Noah's Flood)...

However I find it hard to believe Noah's flood is a literal story of an actual historical event, but I am open to interpreting it in any way that may make sense of its content... Was there really a flood? Im not sure...

Also,

This is what the Bible says in John (Where the "Word" is from the Greek word "Logos").
Quote:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

Which is interesting, itst it? The "word", or human communication would be a very important aspect of historical documentation..

And if we take the story of Adam and Eve, it is about humans coming into consciousness, and gaining knowledge... That is what the Tree of "knowledge of Good and Evil", has also been translated as, the "Tree of Consciousness"..

And isnt it funny that sources say:

Quote:
What is the beginning of human history?

In terms of world history, recorded history is first seen in accounts of the ancient world, around the 4th millenium BC. This coincides with the invention of writing.....

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-begin ... AR05WRxiJa...

Marking that about 6000 years ago, when history began with the word.

And, isnt it funny that, that Genesis names the rivers going through the Garden of Eden, that are now known in Southern Mesopotamia modern day Iraq.
And that:

[Where did human history begin?]
"Early civilizations arose first in Lower Mesopotamia (3000 BCE)..."..

"Whether in prehistoric or historic times, people always needed to be near reliable sources of potable water. Settlements developed on river banks as early as 3000 BCE in Mesopotamia"
(History of the world)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History ... ADS9GzT9OF...

I am beginning to think even the story of the garden of Eden may have some kind of historical value as well..

[Tcg]

Personally, as a Christian, i am utterly fascinated by how the Bible came to be.. What is the reasonable thing to conclude about how its stories came into existence?

Given that you are a Christian claiming to know how the Bible came to be, you should be able to answer that for us.

Personally I think it is very clear that the Hebrews kept detailed documents about the lineage of their family trees, and it is reasonable to believe that it goes (at least) back to King David, the House of David...

Now all you need to do is provide evidence of these documents so that we can all see it as clearly as you.

But what is historical in the Bible? It is clear that Israel had documentation of its history, at least to some extent. It's wars, its laws, its linage....

Yes, great question, what is historical in the Bible?

But even "Hebrew" the language, came as a Semitic language, perhaps some time in the second millennium BC... So the story of Adam and Eve would have happened BEFORE the language was invented... And i find it interesting that these languages came into existence, around the same time the Bible tells the story of the Tower of Babel... Could the story have some kind of historical value? Even if it being a parable in some ways?

Another great question. Do you have a great answer?

And it is clear that, for example, Genesis 10 has some kind of historical value to it, in this chapter they list the nations around the world. So there must have been some kind of knowledge of the nations around the world at this point in the story (right after Noah's Flood)…

Your unsupported opinion is noted.

However I find it hard to believe Noah's flood is a literal story of an actual historical event, but I am open to interpreting it in any way that may make sense of its content... Was there really a flood? Im not sure...

Please provide the interpretation that makes sense of it's content.

Also,

This is what the Bible says in John (Where the "Word" is from the Greek word "Logos").
Quote:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

Which is interesting, itst it? The "word", or human communication would be a very important aspect of historical documentation..

Yes, very interesting.

And if we take the story of Adam and Eve, it is about humans coming into consciousness, and gaining knowledge... That is what the Tree of "knowledge of Good and Evil", has also been translated as, the "Tree of Consciousness"..

And isnt it funny that sources say:

Quote:
What is the beginning of human history?

In terms of world history, recorded history is first seen in accounts of the ancient world, around the 4th millenium BC. This coincides with the invention of writing.....

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-begin ... AR05WRxiJa...

Marking that about 6000 years ago, when history began with the word.

And, isnt it funny that, that Genesis names the rivers going through the Garden of Eden, that are now known in Southern Mesopotamia modern day Iraq.
And that:

[Where did human history begin?]
"Early civilizations arose first in Lower Mesopotamia (3000 BCE)..."..

"Whether in prehistoric or historic times, people always needed to be near reliable sources of potable water. Settlements developed on river banks as early as 3000 BCE in Mesopotamia"
(History of the world)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History ... ADS9GzT9OF...

Yes, that is very funny.

I am beginning to think even the story of the garden of Eden may have some kind of historical value as well..

I am beginning to wonder what any of this has to do with the topic which is the creation mythology, not the garden mythology.


Tcg