U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-02-2010, 12:57 PM
 
1,932 posts, read 4,258,630 times
Reputation: 1233

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
<snip>..and acknowledging that the scriptures are for SPIRITUAL (NOT CARNAL OR WORLDLY) purposes. They are NOT historical or scientific . . .
Yes, the scriptures are for spiritual purposes. I never said the scriptures are a science textbook. However, the scriptures are also historical. The geneologies in Genesis are historical. Sodom and Gomorrah are historical. I and II Kings is historical. Even the NT is historical, as it traces the path of Christ, from birth to death to resurrection and as it traces the beginnings of the Christian movement.

Why is it so difficult for people to accept Genesis as historical? Noah was real, as Jesus taught about him. Cain and Abel were real as Jesus taught about them. Jesus taught from the OT scriptures during his time here on earth and he validated that they came from God, not man. So why can so few trust what Genesis clearly teaches as the beginning of everthing?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-04-2010, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,391,622 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by mams1559 View Post
Yes, the scriptures are for spiritual purposes. I never said the scriptures are a science textbook. However, the scriptures are also historical. The geneologies in Genesis are historical. Sodom and Gomorrah are historical. I and II Kings is historical. Even the NT is historical, as it traces the path of Christ, from birth to death to resurrection and as it traces the beginnings of the Christian movement.

Why is it so difficult for people to accept Genesis as historical? Noah was real, as Jesus taught about him. Cain and Abel were real as Jesus taught about them. Jesus taught from the OT scriptures during his time here on earth and he validated that they came from God, not man. So why can so few trust what Genesis clearly teaches as the beginning of everthing?
One reason I have a hard time with Genesis as an historical account is the recording of it... who was there to write all this down? Furthermore, say that Adam was told by God to write all of it down...did he have to invent writing material first? OK so maybe God wrote it for Adam on stone... did Adam have to learn to read first? Ahhh.. well then perhaps it was orally passed down from generation to generation UNTIL they had the ability to record the information... That would make more sense but then we all know what happens when we pass on information from one person to another...it changes little by little until it is hardly recognizable.

The point is that if Genesis is a record of the creation of all things... who wrote it and where did they get their information.

At best, we can conclude that the account in Genesis was never meant to be an absolute representation, and at worst it is simply the philosophical imaginings of a Creator by the Created.

It seems a bit naive to assume it is word for word accurate in describing how the world was formed.

Of course all of that applies to evolution as well. I like to admit that if there aren't any eye witness accounts then we will simply NEVER know.
I can live with that... can you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 04:11 PM
 
51 posts, read 55,554 times
Reputation: 24
Heb 11:3
3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
KJV

Faith comes by the Voice of the Lord, who is now Jesus the Christ, our Lord.

We learn "about" God through authoritative communications, written and oral. This type of communication is "knowledge," and it puffs up our conceits and makes us feel we are somebody, especially when praise and wealth come to us through this knowledge.

As it was with Noah, Abraham, Job and Saul, the speaking of the Lord to us personally, brought the faith that understands that the worlds were framed by the word of God and that leads to the obedience to the Voice. The one who has not experienced this will either call it blasphemy or they will ridicule it as foolishness.

Luke 8:21
21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it. KJV

Eojj
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,302 posts, read 5,289,114 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
One reason I have a hard time with Genesis as an historical account is the recording of it... who was there to write all this down? Furthermore, say that Adam was told by God to write all of it down...did he have to invent writing material first? OK so maybe God wrote it for Adam on stone... did Adam have to learn to read first? Ahhh.. well then perhaps it was orally passed down from generation to generation UNTIL they had the ability to record the information... That would make more sense but then we all know what happens when we pass on information from one person to another...it changes little by little until it is hardly recognizable.

The point is that if Genesis is a record of the creation of all things... who wrote it and where did they get their information.

At best, we can conclude that the account in Genesis was never meant to be an absolute representation, and at worst it is simply the philosophical imaginings of a Creator by the Created.

It seems a bit naive to assume it is word for word accurate in describing how the world was formed.

Of course all of that applies to evolution as well. I like to admit that if there aren't any eye witness accounts then we will simply NEVER know.
I can live with that... can you?
Undoubtedly it was passed by word of mouth, which was very common in the ancient world. Considering the practical issues of that ancient time, Moses (around 1300 BC), there weren't any organized written languages yet. Actual written languages would develop around 100 to 300 years later. Only symbol systems such as Egyptian hieroglyphics and Sumerian cunieform yet existed, and they were not languages at all. Worse yet, they were not capable of expressing sophisticated concepts such as the Sabbath as we have in the scriptures. It would likely take hundreds of picture symbols to express the single sentence, Honor the Sabbath. It would be hard to imagine Moses taking the time to carve thousands of picture symbols into blocks of stone, along the lines of the heiroglyphics that existed at that time.

So, for very practical reasons, it seems almost certain that (a) Moses was certainly the "author" of the First Five Books of the Bible, but that (b) he did not actually write them down. After all, he was leading a group of people across a desert and in even more dire situations, and had many more urgent things to be dealing with that carving symbols into stones! And then carrying large numbers of such stones to carve with through the desert! So it seems almost certain that Moses did NOT physically write down the texts, but instead passed them along orally, in the same way that countless societies before and since have done.

By around 1000 BC, written language had developed in the region, including Ancient Hebrew or Paleo-Hebrew, and it seems clear that people thought it important to then write down, in a permanent form, the words of Moses. Over the 300-year period between Moses and them (around 15 generations of people) many people had had to memorize and repeat, exactly, all the thousands of words of Moses to the next generation. They were certainly extremely good at preserving those "oral traditions" but human beings are not perfect. And so it seems very reasonable to me that (at least) two SLIGHTLY different oral traditions of Moses' words could easily have existed by fifteen generations later in 1000 BC. It therefore seems reasonable to me that two separate Scribes (around that time) may have written down slightly different texts. One of those people might easily have heard the oral tradition where God was referred to as Elohim, and so he might easily have written down a text that only refers to Elohim. The other might have heard and memorized an oral tradition where God was referred to as Jehovah/Yahweh, both of which are in our Bibles today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 04:58 PM
 
1,932 posts, read 4,258,630 times
Reputation: 1233
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
One reason I have a hard time with Genesis as an historical account is the recording of it... who was there to write all this down? Furthermore, say that Adam was told by God to write all of it down...did he have to invent writing material first? OK so maybe God wrote it for Adam on stone... did Adam have to learn to read first? Ahhh.. well then perhaps it was orally passed down from generation to generation UNTIL they had the ability to record the information... That would make more sense but then we all know what happens when we pass on information from one person to another...it changes little by little until it is hardly recognizable.

The point is that if Genesis is a record of the creation of all things... who wrote it and where did they get their information.

At best, we can conclude that the account in Genesis was never meant to be an absolute representation, and at worst it is simply the philosophical imaginings of a Creator by the Created.

It seems a bit naive to assume it is word for word accurate in describing how the world was formed.

Of course all of that applies to evolution as well. I like to admit that if there aren't any eye witness accounts then we will simply NEVER know.
I can live with that... can you?
It is my belief that Adam, who was created by God, was intelligent from the start. He was able to talk with God, so he had language. There's no reason to assume he didn't know how to write as well.

It is widely accepted that Moses wrote the pentateuch, the first five books of the bible. Whether Moses was strictly and solely guided to write it by the Holy Spirit alone or whether he could have possibly had reference material that was passed from generation to generation through Adam's line to him is debatable. I'm not dogmatic about it either way, as all scripture is God breathed and relates what God wanted to reveal to us through the scriptures.

I am also not implying that the scriptures give a blow-by-blow of the exact physical/meta-physical/supernatural happenings as to the creation. There is some room for interpretation and extrapolation from the Genesis account that is done by YEC scholars. However, what Genesis does implicitly provide and what we can gain knowledge from is that the "overall" or "general" description of what God created and in what order directly contradicts the evolution version.

Based on that contradiction, who am I going to believe? God, who was the eyewitness to creation, because He is the creator, and who passed on what he did through His word to us or man's attempt at explaining origins via the ToE that precludes any supernatural events and excludes God as a possiblity from the outset?

The evolutionary/naturalistic/materialistic version has no foundation as to where the particles came from that were "in the beginning" to cause the supposed Big Bang. There's no direct observational evidence that can explain this.

The evolutionary/naturalistic/materialistic version has no foundation as to how life arose from non-life to give rise to the first single-celled organism (from which we supposedly all are decended from). There's no direct observational evidence that can explain this. Quite the contrary, laws of biology state that life can only arise from life.

The evolutionary/naturalistic/materialistic version of origins has no foundation as to who, what or when. It relies upon time+chance.

It seems to me the evolutionary/naturalistic/materialistic version of events needs more faith to believe than the biblical version.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 06:52 PM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
2,031 posts, read 2,687,594 times
Reputation: 528
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
OK so maybe God wrote it for Adam on stone... did Adam have to learn to read first? Ahhh.. well then perhaps it was orally passed down from generation to generation UNTIL they had the ability to record the information... That would make more sense but then we all know what happens when we pass on information from one person to another...it changes little by little until it is hardly recognizable.
This is simply not true. We don't live in an oral culture so it's hard to imagine information not becoming misconstrued, but in actuality in oral cultures this is attainable. Rabbis memorized God's Word word for word. Not just parts...they memorized everything! When young boys were in training to becomes Rabbis they couldn't even comment on scripture before they memorized it word for word. It's a totally different way of thinking and learning compared to our culture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 07:46 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,391,622 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by CantWait2Leave View Post
This is simply not true. We don't live in an oral culture so it's hard to imagine information not becoming misconstrued, but in actuality in oral cultures this is attainable. Rabbis memorized God's Word word for word. Not just parts...they memorized everything! When young boys were in training to becomes Rabbis they couldn't even comment on scripture before they memorized it word for word. It's a totally different way of thinking and learning compared to our culture.
Memorization doesn't help when each generation has their own 'lingo.'

Just look at the differences in the way parables were, speech, the thee's and thou's of the KJV... The words may be the same even... but the message is lost or is adapted by the next generation and the next and the next...etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 10:57 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,302 posts, read 5,289,114 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Memorization doesn't help when each generation has their own 'lingo.'

Just look at the differences in the way parables were, speech, the thee's and thou's of the KJV... The words may be the same even... but the message is lost or is adapted by the next generation and the next and the next...etc.
In western culture yes, but in ancient cultures like the Hebrew, it is a completely different story. I am going with Can'tWaittoLeave...he is correct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 11:04 PM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
2,031 posts, read 2,687,594 times
Reputation: 528
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Memorization doesn't help when each generation has their own 'lingo.'

Just look at the differences in the way parables were, speech, the thee's and thou's of the KJV... The words may be the same even... but the message is lost or is adapted by the next generation and the next and the next...etc.
So you don't believe in the Bible since you think it's been changed over the years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 11:16 PM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
2,031 posts, read 2,687,594 times
Reputation: 528
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
In western culture yes, but in ancient cultures like the Hebrew, it is a completely different story. I am going with Can'tWaittoLeave...he is correct.
Yeah, this isn't just my opinion. I've read a lot on oral cultures and when one understand them, one see how information is accurately passed down generation after generation. This is taken from the Case for Christ, "Education, learning, worship, teaching in religious communities all was done by word of mouth...The community constantly monitored what was said and intervened to make corrections along the way. That would preserve the integrity of the message."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top