If Genesis is Metaphorical, what's the metaphor?

Call me a little slow but could you, just for explanantions sake, give us an overview if what those two genesis stories are?It's not that I don't know them, I would just like to see how they are viewed in the current context of this thread.Thanks.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

As far as I know, Genesis isn't metaphorical, simply misunderstood and underappreciated. True one can establish metaphorical as well as moral parallels but to state that it is a metaphor in itself is taking the book in the wrong direction.Genesis is part of the pentatauch, ascribed to Moses. Naturally he didn't recieve what is in it just through divine inspiration. Moses as we all know was brought up in Egypt, and by Egyptian standards was what we would call a highly respected scholar.He was taught by the best that Egypt had to offer. As for his Hebrew heritage, he had forty years in the desert to acquaint himself with Hebrew custom and lore. This is a man who spent most of his life learning in one way or another.Now, my question is what is divine inspiration?As the word states, it is inspiration that is human in outlook but with divine guidance.Moses may have borrowed similar and even opposing stories from a series of different sources, whether they be Hebrew, Egyptian, Cimmerian, Hittite, Babylonian or Persian.It doesn't matter that these stories, many of which survive to the present day, were borrowed by Moses to compose the Pentatauch (specifically Genesis), what is important is that he was guided in the choices he made by Gods divine inspiration.As has been referenced here, many of these stories are what we call Morally instructive stories or parables but even we know that legends are most times based on a kernel of truth. Why should it be surprising that God influenced Moses choice not only for metaphorical, symbolistic value but for factual accounts as well?

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Chiroptera,We have to assume many things when we read the Bible, faith plays a part here. That must be left to the individual.As for your comment can you also assume that he did exist? We can play that game all year round and still not come up with answer that will satisfy everybody equally.I suppose you have heard of Troy?Up until the 19th Century, Troy was supposed to be a Fable, a legend that was never supposed to have existed. Homer first mentioned the story of Troy in the Illiad and Odyssey. As such it was a fabled account of Heroism and also of the despotic and base nature of man. It was used as a metaphor many times.Charles Mclaren in 1822 found the ruins of Troy left from Hellenistic and Roman Illion at Hisarlik, Canakkale in Turkey. Boy was everybody surprised!!There are even some accounts of fellow archeologists putting the find in doubt, he he he...Speaking of Homer, wasn't he a poet who wrote in poetic form as well as prose?
...................................................................................jar,When you say some folk, I hope you realize that all of Judaism and I would say most of Christianity don't dispute this affirmation.If you insist on seeing the Bible (one can't single out a book and forget the rest!)as just a collection of stories, that is your perrogitive and right. I won't argue with that.Also please post a link as to where it says that there are too many indications that Genesis was written by many different people, from many different cultures, many different periods and many different voices. I suppose you can back that up.
...................................................................................mikehager,I totally agree with you that, the stories can be used to convey the message you posted, yet would you deny that, as christians it is necessary to take the extra step of faith that changes a dead text into a living one?

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

So would I!!!But the city was found even if the rest is hogwash. In every story there is a kernel of truth.Saying that Moses didn't exist is just too convenient, don't you think?
Hey, maybe Jesus didn't exist, and the bible is just a collection of fancy tales to put the children to bed at night. That my friend is where faith comes into the picture...Those who have it know in their hearts, whether others like it or not.So let's all become evolutionists and end the debate. The forum can close down. We have all the answers we need.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

All things being relative and equal, right?I'm afraid that isn't how christianity works, only philosophers take that stance.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

jar,Taking into account that these are statements made by the Rev. Bennett J. Sims, retired Bishop of Atlanta, who, after just one little search on the web turned out to be a progressive liberal christian, who will not defend the bible and the God he serves.Who advocates gay marriage, when it is expressly forbidden in the bible http://www.integrityva.org/hu_theology.htm. Who is also a political activist, doesn't say much for the reliability of this particular source.Still, he states that "Textual research shows that these two accounts are from two distinct eras, the first later in history, the second earlier."Where in fact can I find this textual research?P.S This is the kind of person who professes that all things are relative and thus equal. That is not, as we know, the standing of a christian. At best he is a philosopher who wears a white collar.This message has been edited by Jor-el, 23 February 2005 00:58 AM

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Since that is the case, the most that you can get from the bible is a good story. The words will only be words and they can never breathe life and faith.I respect that, it takes courage, which I honestly admit I will never have, even though I am flawed and many times a poor example as a christian.But the faith is there and that makes it worthwhile. I can't and will never want to turn my back on that.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Then let us not discuss him, but what he bases his statements on.What is the source material he used to make that affirmation?

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

This "Documentary Hypothesis" warrants further study.As it is, it's a good starting point to clear up the "Moses wrote the Pentateuch" discussion.

And where will faith without the guidance of the bible (Gods word)take you? Without it and Gods word in conjunction, supporting each other, you will just be going around in circles. At best you will get Anthropomorphism or a plurideistic culture. We as humans left that ages ago.PS. I know this is off-topic and from now on I'll stick to the topic as best I can.

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Like I said, each to his own.I'm just doing what my human nature influences me to do. I'm supporting my belief in the bible, not only as a historical book, but a god inspired book.I apologize if that makes you uncomfortable. You can't seem to accept that people look at this book in that way. If you don't, I'm OK with that, try took give the same latitude to others.I speak about what speaks to me in a personal way, I'm not falling into the error and hubris that my beliefs are better than others.If you have to take exception to the fact that I believe in the divinely inspired scripture because in your opinion its a fallacy, then we can also say that you are placing your opinions (beliefs) over those of others.Since this is entirely off-topic, I will not respond any further on this thread to this line of discussion. If you really want to continue, lets move this to a correct thread-topic line.http://EvC Forum: Gods Bible

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

If I may interject at this point to ask a question.Taking into account that you think that all the supposed historical references, are fictional, what other explanations are there at this time that state that the Israelites at the time of Joshua did not conquer Jericho?I'm not talking about the method used to bring the walls down because that could have been done by other more human methods, but the fact remains that todays archeologists found Jericho (with its walls scattered all over the place)had been conquered and destroyed.Are there any historical records that at this time indicate that the Israelites did not do as what is stated in the book of Joshua?

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

I remember having watched a documentary on the "History Channel" that has an interesting parallel to the perspective that societies give to history depending on who is in power.It is commonly thought that Japan started the 2nd front of WW2 by bombarding / attacking Pearl Harbour. This is taught as general history in the USA as well as in most countries around the world.But is it a fact?What is generally not known, is that Japan was forced into this military action by the economic and political policies of the USA at the time.Japan was undergoing great economic growth and depended on the USA at the time for most of its petroleum imports. These imports were at 1st reduced and after a time suspended leaving Japan in a very uncomfortable position. After begging and pleading fell on deaf ears, Japan was left with no option but to take the action it did.Now I ask you, did you learn this tidbit in history class?As I said this is just an example of history being written down from the perspective of the victor in a war.Israel also wrote down its history from its own perspective, the selfsame facts reported by the Babylonians would certainly change accordingly, don't you think?Whether we style the writings as metaphorical by our present day standards is yet another perspective that is biased by the views that influence our world, not neccessarily theirs at that time.They were writing "a history" of their nation according to their perspective, not neccessarily, pure and simple unbiased facts.We all do that, even when we talk of ourselves to another person who doesn't know us well, we try to present our strengths, not our weakness'.Genesis, may not be entirely "historical" according to our perspective, but no-one can say beyond all doubt that it isn't based on some factual record. Perspective and hindsight determine our subjective analysis of the events.(edited due to spelling error.)This message has been edited by Jor-el, 28 February 2005 19:17 AM

---

We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

It would be interesting, to me at least, to know what kind of faith you actually have, considering that it isn't in the classical image that we have of the God of the present day christian church.I'm curious to know how that perspective can change with the knowledge that you apparently have.This is not meant as criticism, just a request for clarification. As I am off-topic, (if you don't want to answer me on this thread) could you just refer me to a thread and message posted by you on this matter?

Well, that as I see it is the crux of the problem between interpretations that we see on this thread. Without a certain ammount of faith in God, a person can only interpret the bible according to his knowledge and that of the society he comes from. This perspective as applied here automatically excludes all possibilities other than that which is accepted by that person and his society.Namely a supernatural perspective, which is grounded in ones faith.A person who doesn't believe in God is as naturally biased as one who believes in the existence of God. That perspective and that bias is almost impossible to overcome naturally. For those who believe in the metaphorical genisis, there is a natural tendency to dismiss the whole book as fictional as pertaining to the accounts therin, for those who have faith and a belief in God the opposite is just as natural.There can really never be an understanding between the two viewpoints nor a middleground.