|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Genesis: is it to be taken literally? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
grass monkey Inactive Member |
Your obviously a fan of Spawn eh?
If it angers you too much I'll change the avatar or username, but I'll only do this cos your a fan eh, not for any none-fans though.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Hey, it's your call, guy. Whatever makes you happy.
But yeah, give it an hour or so, I think it's definitely time to bring back the comics thread. We can carry on there. "As the days go by, we face the increasing inevitability that we are alone in a godless, uninhabited, hostile and meaningless universe. Still, you've got to laugh, haven't you?" -Holly
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Sylas quote: (context of what Genesis is)
______________________________________________________________________ It is a creation myth ______________________________________________________________________ That is your subjective opinion. Sylas quote:_____________________________________________________________________ The basic purpose of the first chapter of Genesis is most likely to defend monotheism in the face of surrounding polythesitic cultures. ______________________________________________________________________ This is an ancient belief that defies the text. Genesis DOES NOT initiate monotheism, it DECLARES the one and only true polytheistic Deity - the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Joseph. How so ? Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created...." Wrong translation ! It should be translated "In the beginning GODS created...." The original hebrew says "Elohim", that is the plural name of God. It means what it says, hence, God is letting everyone know that the Godhead as revealed elsewhere in scripture created the heavens and the Earth. Go ahead and check me out in any hebrew commentary on Genesis. Sylas quote:______________________________________________________________________ The carefully structured arrangement of events has noticable parallels with other creation accounts of the time ______________________________________________________________________ Yes. Why ? Because the Genesis account is the God-protected version of the truth. All the others are unguarded by God. These other accounts evidence a common source (Genesis) and they corroborate that these events did happen. This explains the similarities and common denominators. The claim made for Genesis is that it is God's eternal word, authored by God as a record of the truth. Any evos reading this ? Tell me how ToE disproves Genesis without using the filter of your worldview ? Sylas quote:______________________________________________________________________ Ancient readers, prior to the rise of science, did tend to take these accounts as "true", but this was basically a consequence of the fact that there were no alternatives, ______________________________________________________________________ In other words Sylas is placing himself on a pedestal, then he looks down on the ancients from his lofty perch erected upon matter-based deity, and subjectively declares that the scientific worldview is the only pathway to determine truth. Let a theist interpret: Genesis is above your head - your self inflated dismissal indicates the lack of any spiritual sense or understanding. You sound like the religionists that science ridicules for having a closed mind. Sylas quote:______________________________________________________________________ Genesis is about. It is expressing theological principles, ______________________________________________________________________ Theology is superior to any other principle because God's subjective views are objective truth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi WT,
If you want to stipulate that then I cannot prevent it, but everyone knows that when Genesis is equated with the adjective "myth" that the author is saying that they believe the claims of Genesis are NOT TRUE. I am sorry WT, but everyone who equates Genesis with myth is not saying that they believe that Genesis is untrue, only someone who has no idea what a myth is would say that.
Yes, I completely agree. My point was that God's subjective views are the only subjective views that become objective, automatically, IF HE IS. Why do they automatically become objective, God doesn’t have a monopoly on truth WT.
But, to go on and redefine myth is essentially a worthless stipulation. But I haven’t redefined ‘myth’. Maybe I have used a definition that you are unfamiliar with?
Nobody is going to reconfigure their perception of what myth means People should reconfigure their perceptions of what anything means if they have been mistaken about what that thing is. Anyone who equates ‘myth’ with ’fiction’ doesn’t know what myth means. Brian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
matt_dabbs Inactive Junior Member |
Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created...." Wrong translation ! It should be translated "In the beginning GODS created...." The original hebrew says "Elohim", that is the plural name of God.
I don't understand this...are you saying the Bible actually says it was GODS (plural) that created the universe and not God himself? Of course, that would make more sense since God repeatedly says us throughout the creation story: Gen 1:26a -- Then God said, "Let US make Adam in OUR image, according to OUR likeness;" etc. "The religion of the invisible pink unicorn is based both on faith and logic...through faith we know that the unicorn is pink, while logic tells us it is invisible."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
MonkeyBoy Inactive Member |
Jar!
You are the one that said this: The Map is not the Territory. A Treasure Map is not the Treasure. I was trying to find that quote; that really opened my eyes, in my search for god. I completely agree, if some or most of the bible is 'discovered' to be errant, that will not affect my faith in the slightest. Carry on.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I certainly can't take any credit for it, but you may want to read Language in Thought and Action by S.I. Hayakawa.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
MarkAustin Member (Idle past 3815 days) Posts: 122 From: London., UK Joined: |
matt_dabbs, "Elohim" is the Hebrew plural for God: thus anywhere in the Bible where that word is used, the correct translation is Gods, although some interpret this as being similar to Kings refering to themselves in the plural.
There is increasing archaeological evidence for a female consort for Yahweh in Palestine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi,
There is evidence from Elephantine of 'Yahweh and his Asherah' a female consort, maybe htis is what you are referring to? Brian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Matt Dabbs excerpt:
______________________________________________________________________I don't understand this...are you saying the Bible actually says it was GODS (plural) that created the universe and not God himself? Of course, that would make more sense since God repeatedly says us throughout the creation story: Gen 1:26a -- Then God said, "Let US make Adam in OUR image, according to OUR likeness;"______________________________________________________________________ I am saying what any O.T. hebrew commentary will tell you, which is that the original hebrew for Gen. 1:1 has "Gods", plural, despite the singular found in most translations. Yes Matt it would make more sense especially in lieu of "us" elsewhere. When the scripture says God is one, that is speaking about unity. Clearly the entire record of the 66 books reveals a three Personage Godhead.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Or simply polytheism.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: This is coming from a Discovery Channel program I watched a while ago, so please let me know if anything is incorrect. There were two names of God given in Genesis 1 and 2, Elohim and Yahweh (or was it Adonai?). The two inter-related but different creation stories in Gen. 1 and 2 seems to support the theory that there were two camps in early Judaism: the polytheist and monotheist camps. The same can be seen in the depiction of the Noachian flood, two different but related tellings of the global flood reflecting two camps within Judaism. My feeling is that if the Genesis accounts of both creation and the Noachian flood can be told in different ways to reflect different theologies (with Elohim and Yahweh being used separately in each version), then why should either be taken as literal fact. That is, the creation and global flood myth are not being stressed as literal fact, but rather a lens through which we can understand the nature of God(s). My contention is that the myths in Genesis are not supposed to be taken literally, but rather figuratively. It is a theological lesson, not a scientific lesson.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
MarkAustin Member (Idle past 3815 days) Posts: 122 From: London., UK Joined: |
The generally accepted scholarly opinion on Bible (in particular Pentuach (sp?) authrship is that Genisis and some other books are a combination of two authors: E who refers to God as Elohim, and J, who refers to him as Yahweh (it's J rather than Y because the original scholars were German, who tend to use a J for the English Y sound), and that these two different traditions were responsible for the duplicated stories.
Later textual analysis identified P, for Priest, responsible for Leviticus, the laws and the geneologies, and D, author of Deiteronomy, which is considered stylisticly distinct. These distinct books were threaded together by R, for Redactor, who put the various stories together, and also added linking passages such as "Now it came to pass, after these things . . ." There's a good summary here on Straight Dope. though I stress I'm not a Bible scholar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
MonkeyBoy Inactive Member |
Thanks for the title, I will read it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Jar quote:
______________________________________________________________________ Or simply polytheism. ______________________________________________________________________ Agreed. BUT, polytheism already being strictly defined to the Gods of Abraham, Isaac, and Joseph.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024