Believe it or not The creation story in the bible could very well be a myth and the amazing thing is the only thing it does is make the story even stronger.evidence suggest that Genesis was not written at the beggining of time but when the isrealites were removed from isreal and taken prisoners by babylon. Now this was very disturbing to the Isrealites because there belief was that only part of the earth that belonged to thier God, the real God, was isreal. Thats where Genesis comes in. Because the creation story which was created then showed something very different. That God created and ruled the whole world, which meant that when the isrealites left isreal God had not abandoned the isrealites.The one thing which has to be true is the fall of man, and we fall everyday so it isn't to difficult to imagine it in a different scenario.The isrealite story is from the pope himself so if you want to poke it full of holes that would be wonderful. ( and don't worry even though I do practice Roman Catholicism myself I won't be offended.) for everyone who hasn't heard. I think Ive told everyone. lol.
the creation story a myth????
- Thread starter Letsgofishing
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
(Letsgofishing;24385)
Believe it or not The creation story in the bible could very well be a myth and the amazing thing is the only thing it does is make the story even stronger.evidence suggest that Genesis was not written at the beggining of time but when the isrealites were removed from isreal and taken prisoners by babylon. Now this was very disturbing to the Isrealites because there belief was that only part of the earth that belonged to thier God, the real God, was isreal. Thats where Genesis comes in. Because the creation story which was created then showed something very different. That God created and ruled the whole world, which meant that when the isrealites left isreal God had not abandoned the isrealites.The one thing which has to be true is the fall of man, and we fall everyday so it isn't to difficult to imagine it in a different scenario.The isrealite story is from the pope himself so if you want to poke it full of holes that would be wonderful. ( and don't worry even though I do practice Roman Catholicism myself I won't be offended.) for everyone who hasn't heard. I think Ive told everyone. lol.
Hello LetsGoFishing,Moses was the one who penned the first five books so I'm sure they weren't "written" at the beginning of time....but the story was from the beginning and it was passed down.
It is their story and was corrupted by Babylon. Some claim the story of Gilgamesh is what the Bible was based on but it was the other way around. The history, the truth was there and they twisted it into a strange tale that hints at the truth of scripture.
The Genesis narrative is true. There are deep truths hidden within that bring greater understanding to the beginning.:study:.........Whirlwind
Believe it or not The creation story in the bible could very well be a myth and the amazing thing is the only thing it does is make the story even stronger.evidence suggest that Genesis was not written at the beggining of time but when the isrealites were removed from isreal and taken prisoners by babylon. Now this was very disturbing to the Isrealites because there belief was that only part of the earth that belonged to thier God, the real God, was isreal. Thats where Genesis comes in. Because the creation story which was created then showed something very different. That God created and ruled the whole world, which meant that when the isrealites left isreal God had not abandoned the isrealites.The one thing which has to be true is the fall of man, and we fall everyday so it isn't to difficult to imagine it in a different scenario.The isrealite story is from the pope himself so if you want to poke it full of holes that would be wonderful. ( and don't worry even though I do practice Roman Catholicism myself I won't be offended.) for everyone who hasn't heard. I think Ive told everyone. lol.
Hello LetsGoFishing,Moses was the one who penned the first five books so I'm sure they weren't "written" at the beginning of time....but the story was from the beginning and it was passed down.
The Genesis narrative is true. There are deep truths hidden within that bring greater understanding to the beginning.:study:.........Whirlwind(whirlwind;24413)
Hello LetsGoFishing,Moses was the one who penned the first five books so I'm sure they weren't "written" at the beginning of time....but the story was from the beginning and it was passed down.
It is their story and was corrupted by Babylon. Some claim the story of Gilgamesh is what the Bible was based on but it was the other way around. The history, the truth was there and they twisted it into a strange tale that hints at the truth of scripture.The Genesis narrative is true. There are deep truths hidden within that bring greater understanding to the beginning.:study:.........Whirlwind
Agreed 100% whirlwind. Amen!JagLovest ye in Christ Yahshua, Lord and Saviour of the world.
Hello LetsGoFishing,Moses was the one who penned the first five books so I'm sure they weren't "written" at the beginning of time....but the story was from the beginning and it was passed down.
The Genesis narrative is true. There are deep truths hidden within that bring greater understanding to the beginning.:study:.........WhirlwindAgreed 100% whirlwind. Amen!JagLovest ye in Christ Yahshua, Lord and Saviour of the world.
As for me, well I believe Genesis it really quite literal. Things happened exactly as they were penned and no other way.
(jkdjr25;24649)
As for me, well I believe Genesis it really quite literal. Things happened exactly as they were penned and no other way.
Do thou believe that Genesis 1:1-2 are Time gap?Jag
As for me, well I believe Genesis it really quite literal. Things happened exactly as they were penned and no other way.
Do thou believe that Genesis 1:1-2 are Time gap?Jag
I choose not to speculate on that. Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't only God knows the answer. I accept it as written in the Word of God which is infallible and inerrant.
(jkdjr25;24653)
I choose not to speculate on that. Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't only God knows the answer. I accept it as written in the Word of God which is infallible and inerrant.
That's fine and dandy...And I can give you the answer. Yes there is a Tim gap between those two verses.Jag
I choose not to speculate on that. Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't only God knows the answer. I accept it as written in the Word of God which is infallible and inerrant.
That's fine and dandy...And I can give you the answer. Yes there is a Tim gap between those two verses.Jag
Nice to know you're omnipotent then. It doesn't say that anywhere so express your logic and how you came to that conclusion.
(jkdjr25;24656)
Nice to know you're omnipotent then. It doesn't say that anywhere so express your logic and how you came to that conclusion.
Who are you calling all-powerful, all knowing? I am a mere human created in the image of God. I am not God. And I don't want be God or be worshipped as a god.Romans 3:10 - As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;I'm going to say this ONLY once.Genesis 1:1Isaiah 45:18II Peter 3:5Genesis 1:2Jeremiah 4:22-28II Peter 3:6Genesis 1:3II Peter 3:7Jag
Nice to know you're omnipotent then. It doesn't say that anywhere so express your logic and how you came to that conclusion.
Who are you calling all-powerful, all knowing? I am a mere human created in the image of God. I am not God. And I don't want be God or be worshipped as a god.Romans 3:10 - As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;I'm going to say this ONLY once.Genesis 1:1Isaiah 45:18II Peter 3:5Genesis 1:2Jeremiah 4:22-28II Peter 3:6Genesis 1:3II Peter 3:7Jag
(crooner;24658)
JagCan you explain that time gap? or give me refference to a web site.Thanks
Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 are talking about the previous Earth Age (First Earth Age)Genesis 1:2 is the verse where the First Earth Age perished.http://www.christianityboard.com/earth-age...-study-t79.htmlJag
JagCan you explain that time gap? or give me refference to a web site.Thanks
Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 are talking about the previous Earth Age (First Earth Age)Genesis 1:2 is the verse where the First Earth Age perished.http://www.christianityboard.com/earth-age...-study-t79.htmlJag
I disagree entirely. For reasons of logic and context if nothing else. If there were a passage of time God would have told us of it. Why would God have waited to continue Creation? This violates the seven day Creation as taught by the Book of Genesis. Since the Bible cannot be both inerrant and completely figurative it follows that it must be literal in this instance. God created then heavens and the earth. The next verse signifies an action immediately following another in sequence. No period of time passed or we would have been told as such. God would not have claimed to create all of creation in only seven days if He had taken two years off.
(jkdjr25;24829)
I disagree entirely. For reasons of logic and context if nothing else. If there were a passage of time God would have told us of it. Why would God have waited to continue Creation? This violates the seven day Creation as taught by the Book of Genesis. Since the Bible cannot be both inerrant and completely figurative it follows that it must be literal in this instance. God created then heavens and the earth. The next verse signifies an action immediately following another in sequence. No period of time passed or we would have been told as such. God would not have claimed to create all of creation in only seven days if He had taken two years off.
He did tell us and nothing is violated. :study: It is just that it is not commonly taught in churches. It is among some of the deeper truths..........Whirlwind
I disagree entirely. For reasons of logic and context if nothing else. If there were a passage of time God would have told us of it. Why would God have waited to continue Creation? This violates the seven day Creation as taught by the Book of Genesis. Since the Bible cannot be both inerrant and completely figurative it follows that it must be literal in this instance. God created then heavens and the earth. The next verse signifies an action immediately following another in sequence. No period of time passed or we would have been told as such. God would not have claimed to create all of creation in only seven days if He had taken two years off.
He did tell us and nothing is violated. :study: It is just that it is not commonly taught in churches. It is among some of the deeper truths..........Whirlwind
(whirlwind;24847)
(jkdjr25;24829)
I disagree entirely.For reasons of logic and context if nothing else. If there were a passage of time God would have told us of it. Why would God have waited to continue Creation? This violates the seven day Creation as taught by the Book of Genesis. Since the Bible cannot be both inerrant and completely figurative it follows that it must be literal in this instance. God created then heavens and the earth. The next verse signifies an action immediately following another in sequence. No period of time passed or we would have been told as such. God would not have claimed to create all of creation in only seven days if He had taken two years off.
He did tell us and nothing is violated. :study: It is just that it is not commonly taught in churches. It is among some of the deeper truths..........WhirlwindOf course the three Earth Ages is not commonly taught in churches. I agree with you...it is a deeper study whirlwind.JagLovest thou in Christ Yahshua, our Lord and Saviour.
(jkdjr25;24829)
I disagree entirely.For reasons of logic and context if nothing else. If there were a passage of time God would have told us of it. Why would God have waited to continue Creation? This violates the seven day Creation as taught by the Book of Genesis. Since the Bible cannot be both inerrant and completely figurative it follows that it must be literal in this instance. God created then heavens and the earth. The next verse signifies an action immediately following another in sequence. No period of time passed or we would have been told as such. God would not have claimed to create all of creation in only seven days if He had taken two years off.
He did tell us and nothing is violated. :study: It is just that it is not commonly taught in churches. It is among some of the deeper truths..........WhirlwindOf course the three Earth Ages is not commonly taught in churches. I agree with you...it is a deeper study whirlwind.JagLovest thou in Christ Yahshua, our Lord and Saviour.
Again I disagree. You're saying that you somehow are more enlightened to a deeper mystery, hidden by God for only a select few to understand. This is a gnostic teaching about scripture. The meaning is plain and literal, nothing else makes sense when tested by logic and common sense.
When the Lord spoke to Job and asked whether he was there when he brought creation into existance do we consider that he was speaking to Job only? When the sons of god shouted with joy as creation was brought forth do we consider or really care that Adam was there?God is eternal and a Creator, and if we believe that the King of the Ages is due to return could we presume He is the King of the Ages or that He is the King of the one and only Age. He is the King of the Ages, and that speaks to more than one age. God, our God is not bound by our own reference to just the words of Moses as he recorded the words of Noah, who likely heard from Adam himself or his immediate children. We know from brother John that many more words were spoken by Yeshua, and if they had been recorded all the libraries of the world couldn't contain them. The record we do have of our Lord and God is enough from the Patriarchs to the servants the prophets, to Lord Yeshua and his disciples and those who followed, and we must grant, based on what John said, the testimony doesn't contain all that He has done or could do.Why squabble over the age of the earth? We know who brought it into existence and that should be the focus. The wonder and fact of the creators hand is paramount and not when and what time based on time measures he laid his finger to bring it into being. That He did is the important thing.
(jkdjr25;24862)
Again I disagree. You're saying that you somehow are more enlightened to a deeper mystery, hidden by God for only a select few to understand. This is a gnostic teaching about scripture. The meaning is plain and literal, nothing else makes sense when tested by logic and common sense.
We are enlightened to a deeper mystery but it is in plain view :study:, not hidden for a few. We have shared it with you, not hidden it..... but it is up to you to accept it or not, just as it was for us. ...........Whirlwind
Again I disagree. You're saying that you somehow are more enlightened to a deeper mystery, hidden by God for only a select few to understand. This is a gnostic teaching about scripture. The meaning is plain and literal, nothing else makes sense when tested by logic and common sense.
We are enlightened to a deeper mystery but it is in plain view :study:, not hidden for a few. We have shared it with you, not hidden it..... but it is up to you to accept it or not, just as it was for us. ...........Whirlwind
tim_from_pa
New Member
- Jul 11, 2007
- 1,656
- 13
- 0
- 66
("jkdjr25")
I disagree entirely. For reasons of logic and context if nothing else. If there were a passage of time God would have told us of it.
Be careful of your reasoning here. I believe there was a gap of time and it does not bother me if you do not. However, lack of a straightforward statement in the bible, or even silence for that matter does not prove this was not the case. In other words, silence about a matter does not mean it does not exist.An example: People who deny the virgin birth (which the gospels clearly teach) claim it was not so because Paul did not mention it and therefore could not have happened. No, it merely means he did not mention it (nor did he mention the parables for that matter). This does not mean it did not occur.
I disagree entirely. For reasons of logic and context if nothing else. If there were a passage of time God would have told us of it.
Be careful of your reasoning here. I believe there was a gap of time and it does not bother me if you do not. However, lack of a straightforward statement in the bible, or even silence for that matter does not prove this was not the case. In other words, silence about a matter does not mean it does not exist.An example: People who deny the virgin birth (which the gospels clearly teach) claim it was not so because Paul did not mention it and therefore could not have happened. No, it merely means he did not mention it (nor did he mention the parables for that matter). This does not mean it did not occur.
(whirlwind;24873)
We are enlightened to a deeper mystery but it is in plain view :study:, not hidden for a few. We have shared it with you, not hidden it..... but it is up to you to accept it or not, just as it was for us. ...........Whirlwind
That is precisely my problem with the argument. There is no deeper mystery, you cannot be enlightened to something that isn't there to begin with. Genesis says that God took seven days to create the world and all the stars in the sky. It therefore follows that He took seven days and seven days only. That is the literal meaning, and therefore the correct one. The Bible cannot be both 100% inerrant and 100% figurative. The two are mutually exclusive. Nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about there being a two year time gap between verse one and two in Genesis 1. Therefore it is a teaching of man that this is so.Since it fails the test of logical application to scripture it fails as a teaching.
We are enlightened to a deeper mystery but it is in plain view :study:, not hidden for a few. We have shared it with you, not hidden it..... but it is up to you to accept it or not, just as it was for us. ...........Whirlwind
That is precisely my problem with the argument. There is no deeper mystery, you cannot be enlightened to something that isn't there to begin with. Genesis says that God took seven days to create the world and all the stars in the sky. It therefore follows that He took seven days and seven days only. That is the literal meaning, and therefore the correct one. The Bible cannot be both 100% inerrant and 100% figurative. The two are mutually exclusive. Nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about there being a two year time gap between verse one and two in Genesis 1. Therefore it is a teaching of man that this is so.Since it fails the test of logical application to scripture it fails as a teaching.
(tim_from_pa;24880)
Be careful of your reasoning here. I believe there was a gap of time and it does not bother me if you do not. However, lack of a straightforward statement in the bible, or even silence for that matter does not prove this was not the case. In other words, silence about a matter does not mean it does not exist.An example: People who deny the virgin birth (which the gospels clearly teach) claim it was not so because Paul did not mention it and therefore could not have happened. No, it merely means he did not mention it (nor did he mention the parables for that matter). This does not mean it did not occur.
The difference there is that the Bible explicitly talks about the virgin birth. To knowingly teach against it fails the test of reason and logic when lining up the teaching to the scriptre. That is the test of any teaching. Line it up with the literal interpretation of scripture, if the teaching fails to line up then its a teaching you should probably avoid.The Bible says creation in 7 days, not creation in two years and seven days. Therefore the teaching fails the test of logic as God is not a liar, nor a deceiver.
Be careful of your reasoning here. I believe there was a gap of time and it does not bother me if you do not. However, lack of a straightforward statement in the bible, or even silence for that matter does not prove this was not the case. In other words, silence about a matter does not mean it does not exist.An example: People who deny the virgin birth (which the gospels clearly teach) claim it was not so because Paul did not mention it and therefore could not have happened. No, it merely means he did not mention it (nor did he mention the parables for that matter). This does not mean it did not occur.
The difference there is that the Bible explicitly talks about the virgin birth. To knowingly teach against it fails the test of reason and logic when lining up the teaching to the scriptre. That is the test of any teaching. Line it up with the literal interpretation of scripture, if the teaching fails to line up then its a teaching you should probably avoid.The Bible says creation in 7 days, not creation in two years and seven days. Therefore the teaching fails the test of logic as God is not a liar, nor a deceiver.
Similar threads
