What becomes of our faith if the Genesis account is NOT literal?

[St. SteVen]

This point causes me a massive amount of cognitive dissonance. (something most won't admit)

The gospel and the New Testament narrative unravel when these things aren't literal.

- The geologies are meaningless. (or in serious error)
- Who wrote the Books of Moses? (and when)
- If Adam wasn't a literal human then he didn't literally sin.
- If Adam didn't literally sin, then there is no original sin.
- If there is no original sin then being born in Adam's race does not make you a sinner.
- If we are not redeemed from original sin by Christ's payment of the death penalty...
- Then the Atonement was of none effect.
- If the Atonement was of none effect, we are lost in our sin and awaiting judgment of our works.
- We all fall short of the perceived standard (the glory of God) and stand condemned.
- Faith in Christ can't help us, the Atonement is null and void. (as outlined above)
- Where does that leave us?

Alternatively:
- There is anecdotal evidence (and in some cases historical evidence) that faith in Christ can help us.
- And that a renewed relationship with the creator is possible. (assuming we were alienated prior)

But how can this be when church doctrine is a house of cards?
- Is a relationship with the creator of figment of our imagination? (wishful thinking?)
- Might we conjure up our own salvation to quell the fear of the unknown?

It's enough to drive one mad. (as my British friends might say)

I like what some atheists conclude.
Living your life as if there might be a God works better than living your life as if there isn't a God, (just in case?) - LOL

]

 

[ElieG12]

BUT the Genesis account is literal.

All long biblical Jewish genealogies go back to Adam.

Human civilization does not exceed the fourth millennium BC, and coincides with the time of the creation of man according to the biblical account.

Human languages do not exceed the Sumerian language, the first known human language that only dates back to the 4th millenium BC.

Jesus considered the first human couple to be a real couple:

Matt. 19:4 In reply he said: “Have you not read that the one who created them from the beginning made them male and female 5 and said: ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’? 6 So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together, let no man put apart.”

Throughout the Bible it is considered that the entry of sin and death into human genetics was due to the sin of our first parents.

The Creator did not make this planet to leave it uninhabited, and He did not create humans to suffer or die.

 

[St. SteVen]

BUT the Genesis account is literal.

Yes. I have always believed that, But I encounter Christians that don't believe that.
If they are right, what happens to the message of the Bible? (unravels)
This is somewhat of a follow-up to this previous topic.

What is the affect on The Fall and The Atonement, if Adam was not the first human?

Since Jesus died to pay the death penalty for original sin, what happens if you remove the original sinner? Or to state this another way... How does our view of origins affect our doctrine? Trying to sort this out in my own mind. Stuck somewhere between science and religion. Send help! -...

www.christianityboard.com

]

 

[ElieG12]

Christendom is very divided. It has many sects within it, and even within the same group they are divided into different beliefs on the same issue.

All Jehovah's Witnesses in the world think alike about biblical matters.

1 Pet. 3:8 Finally, all of you have unity of mind, fellow feeling, brotherly affection, tender compassion, and humility.

 

[Bob]

Thank you for your posts on this sensitive topic to some Christians.

God does not implant scientific knowledge in our brains. We must work to discover it (but He does help us assemble the facts to form an understanding of His creation).

5,000 years ago, the state of our knowledge of geology, physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, etc. was tiny compared to what we know now, and have employed in order to help all people have physically better lives. Those that were inspired by God to write the Bible did the best they could with the scientific knowledge of the day, and that is OK, because ultimately the purpose of the Bible is to help us spiritually.

God has clearly stated His expectations for all people and His promises to all people. If we love Him as creator, redeemer, & sustainer, He promises abundant life and hope for the future.

These truths do not hang on the age of the earth, or when Adam and Eve lived, or why we are constantly tempted to follow selfish desires instead of loving Him and our neighbors.

Peace and blessings.

 

[ElieG12]

Although the writers of the Bible were not scientists nor did science know what it knows today, the one who inspired the Bible was God himself. He had inspired men write it for mankind, so that we would know many truths concerning the past, present and future.

God was not interested in giving us a science book to become scientists, because that is why he gave us the ability to observe and reason, but when the Bible talks about scientific matters, it is not the human writer who writes his point of view but God who uses it to express to us what he wants us to know.

Nor is the Bible a psychology book. But when God advises us, he does so with the wisdom that no modern psychologist can count on, because he was the one who made us, while modern psychologists can only see our behavior and deduce things. They make mistakes, but the one who made us does not. That is why when God advises in the Bible, it is better to follow that advice, because it will be the best.

Nor is the Bible a history book of humanity; We find almost nothing in it that can be related to China, such an ancient country. But when the Bible relates historical facts, it cannot say falsehood about the events it relates, because it is God himself helping us understand a part of history that concerns us for our own present and future.

 

[St. SteVen]

Thank you for your posts on this sensitive topic to some Christians.

My pleasure. Thanks for joining the discussion.

Those that were inspired by God to write the Bible did the best they could with the scientific knowledge of the day, and that is OK, because ultimately the purpose of the Bible is to help us spiritually.

The the scriptures were inspired by God, why would they need to depend on up-to-date scientific knowledge?

God has clearly stated His expectations for all people and His promises to all people. If we love Him as creator, redeemer, & sustainer, He promises abundant life and hope for the future.

Do you believe that Adam was the first man and that all of humankind are in Adam's race?
If not, what happens to my list of questions/observations in the OP?

]

 

[PGS11]

Like the poster said if Genesis is not true none of it is true because Jesus would not have to make the sacrifice.We were all condemned universally in the fall and only Jesus can raise us up to new life.If none of it is true the whole thing is a sham.It is completely dependent on the fall of mankind or it makes no sense.Is humanity in a fallen state I think so and death is in everything just as the bible says.Everything is moving towards death and destruction in this reality the creative force is the only thing keeping it going if life was not renewed daily there would be nothing but death.So yes it does appear to be a fallen world with death everywhere.You can't even stay in a moment its gone before you think about it. There is nothing eternal in this reality.If you were immortal in this reality it would be hell and eventually you would find yourself on a dead planet or floating in space.This in not a reality for immortality.

 

[St. SteVen]

Like the poster said if Genesis is not true none of it is true...

What do we make of so many conflicts with science? And even history. ???
Archeologists say there is no evidence of the Israelites being in Egypt, the Exodus, wanderings or conquest of Canaan.

]

 

[PGS11]

Well the spiritual world is real there is so much testimony and videos and personal experience you can't call it BS.If a person wants to believe their just meat then so be it.That doesn't take much though and is the easiest path to explaining life.

 

[Bob]

My pleasure. Thanks for joining the discussion.


The the scriptures were inspired by God, why would they need to depend on up-to-date scientific knowledge?


Do you believe that Adam was the first man and that all of humankind are in Adam's race?
If not, what happens to my list of questions/observations in the OP?

]

Thank you for your questions.

Although God inspired the scriptures, He was focused on communicating His expectations and promises. He has chosen to leave all scientific discoveries up to us (albeit with His help along the way). Those who wrote the Bible had ancient knowledge about geology, anthropology, etc., and had to make the best of it inferring, e.g., when God created the universe, life, Adam and Eve, etc.

Re Adam and Eve: yes, they were the first people, and yes, they were created by God. (The Bible’s narrative on how it happened makes no sense to me, but you probably already know that.) (Question: who created the first corgi and how?!)

My biggest issue with literal interpretations of the Bible is that it has made it so easy for atheists to teach atheistic science in schools and universities, instead of a God-centered science.

It seems clear that you are committed to your understanding of the Bible, which makes me sad, but at least you love God and your neighbor, for which I am thankful!

 

[Behold]

I like what some atheists conclude.
Living your life as if there might be a God works better than living your life as if there isn't a God, (just in case?) - LOL

You've given your very best effort to try to be convinced that the Holy Bible is one big fat collection of man made errors.
And you're convinced, which explains your never ending assault against... "trust in the bible", .....that you enjoy posting, through some of your slightly veiled Thread's Titles, but its all the same, deed.
I told you last time, that this is the "devil's work"., as the Devil always tries to "cast doubt" on the word of God.
He did it to EVE, and He's using people to do it on FORUMS, and on TV, and in PULPITS.

The thing is, in your devoted effort to try to believe that you can't trust in the word of God, ...you have arrived, and now you have nothing left, but your opinion.

How does that feel, to be that one?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now Reader......

Here is what i can tell you about the word of God.
If you stake your life on it, it'll be worth it, forever.
If you trust it, it will prove itself to you.
Whereas..
If you spend time with people who (hate) (always try to correct the bible) in (books, online sites, forum members, commentaries).... who only want you to never believe it, (that's their agenda)... .. .then you become just like them, given time.

And that's who you are @St. SteVen ., according to so many of your posts and Threads that prove it.

What i can tell you READER, is that i have put my faith in the word of God and the word of God has relentlessly proven that its "of God".

Many times, i have sat down to study the word, and 2+ hrs later i come out of a sort of trance like state, where Christ in me kept showing me "see how this verse, and this verse, and this verse, all say this, and teach that"".
Just more and more revelation.. and the joy of it.. The JOY of it, to be in there like that..

Reader....You have to study... not just read.
And...That is what God will do for anyone, .. .He'll open the scriptures to you...supernaturally... He'll take you inside His word, and show you JESUS everywhere in the BIBLE... .and its incredible.
He'll even show you what a real teacher "sounds like".....
You just have to spend the time, and mostly study Paul's Epistles, as all the KEYS are in there that open all the revelations through Christ.
See, its Paul who told us to """"study the word, and compare scriptures, and discern the word, and rightly divide""".......


Listen, If God was not real, and the Bible was just a religious book of errors, and Jesus The Lord was just a myth, i would not being giving my life to them.
I put them ALL to the test, by FAITH, and they are The Truth.

"Thy word is TRUTH".... and the "word of God, endures forever"..

 

[Deborah_]

The gospel and the New Testament narrative unravel when these things aren't literal.

There is a false dichotomy here. "Literal" doesn't necessarily equate to "true". Plenty of non-literal things are true - Jesus' parables, for example.

Not every part of the Bible has to be interpreted literally. Revelation, for example, is "apocalyptic" literature - which was never intended to be taken literally. The number seven (and multiples of it, like 70 and 144,4000) is very often symbolic - and Genesis 1 is stuffed full of sevens and multiples of seven in the Hebrew, just as Revelation is in the Greek.

- If Adam wasn't a literal human then he didn't literally sin.
- If Adam didn't literally sin, then there is no original sin.
- If there is no original sin then being born in Adam's race does not make you a sinner.

This isn't a logical argument. Adam can be a way of describing or illustrating mankind's original sin without being a literal individual person.

 

[Wick Stick]

This point causes me a massive amount of cognitive dissonance. (something most won't admit)

Used to be me. But I think I've got most of it harmonized to my own satisfaction.

The gospel and the New Testament narrative unravel when these things aren't literal.

I don't think they do. Since this is the unorthodox forum, I hopefully won't get in trouble for sharing some things that are certainly not orthodox.

- The geologies are meaningless. (or in serious error)

There's no conflict with the New Testament on this point. It goes in on genealogies.

John the Baptist tells the doctors of the law that show up to his baptism that they have no right to claim Abraham as their father, despite their genealogies. Paul specifically instructs us to ignore genealogies. Jesus tells us that genealogies are unreliable and that we should instead look at behavior to tell parentage (John 8-10). That is, Abraham's children act like Abraham. Those who act like the devil are the devil's children... even if they are Pharisees of good repute with letters of patent.

- Who wrote the Books of Moses? (and when)

Multiple theories abound. There's the Documentary Hypothesis, and the Supplementary Hypothesis, and the Kenite Hypothesis, just to name a few. With regards to Genesis, I tend to believe the Kenite Hypothesis, which says that Moses inherited a corpus of literature from his father-in-law (Jethro the High Priest of Midian) detailing the history of the Edomites, which subsequently became most of the book of Genesis.

- If Adam wasn't a literal human then he didn't literally sin.

Ever heard of euhemerism? That's when a mythological story is based on a real person. I think that's the case here.

The story of Adam & Eve comes to us from the Edomites. It makes sense that their mythological ancestor is named Adam... Adam and Edom are the same word in Hebrew. Edomites are Adamites, the descendants of Edom/Adam. They built a city called Admah that's also in the Bible.

Have you ever noticed that most of the characters in Genesis have two names? Abraham is also Abram, Jacob is also Israel, and Esau is Edom. That's because there's an Edomite history and an Israelite history that have been edited together, and the names are not the same in each. But if Esau is Edom, then that makes the mythological Adam a real person:

Gen 36:1 Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom.

Compare what you know about Adam to what you know about Esau...

Adam's wife led him to sin, and as a result, he had to leave the garden. He had 3 sons - Cain, Abel, and Seth, and Cain killed Abel and was then forced to move even further away, into the wilderness.

Esau married 2 foreign wives that led him into apostasy, and when he despised his birthright, he had to leave Israel and moved into the desert. He had a grandson named Kenaz, whose descendants the Kenites abandoned the rest of the Edomites and joined the Israelites in a war against them.

As I see it, these are basically the same story, with similar-but-not-identical names, where one has been mythologized and the other looks basically historical.

- If Adam didn't literally sin, then there is no original sin.
- If there is no original sin then being born in Adam's race does not make you a sinner.
- If we are not redeemed from original sin by Christ's payment of the death penalty...
- Then the Atonement was of none effect.

This is an indictment of one interpretation of Scripture. That's the doctrine of Original Sin, as postulated by St. Augustine of Hippo and adopted into the Catholic catechism and from there spread into most flavors of Christianity. But it isn't the only interpretation of Scripture.

Perhaps its time to investigate some other theories of atonement.

 

[Wick Stick]

- We all fall short of the perceived standard (the glory of God) and stand condemned.

That sounds an awful lot like Paul - "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

I fail to see why Original Sin is necessary for this to be true. Don't we ALL sin? Yes we do.

- Faith in Christ can't help us, the Atonement is null and void. (as outlined above)

I don't think that Faith-in-Christ is the same thing as Faith-in-the-Atonement-provided-by-Christ.

Faith-in-Christ means that one has heard what He said and is striving to order one's actions according to His teachings. The focus is on THIS LIFE... by ordering my actions according to His instructions, I am preserved from evils. I live in a state of safety... salvation you might even call it. ;)

That is very different from trusting-that-Jesus-will-rescue-me-even-though-I-did-bad-things. The focus there is on the AFTERLIFE. In this view, this mortal life is mostly inconsequential; it is what-comes-later that matters. Nothing is required of me now but to hunker down and wait for the end. And perhaps avoid doing things that will piss-off a vengeful God.

One of these views is proactive and empowers living, and the other does precisely the opposite, paralyzing people.

- Where does that leave us?

Depends which view you take. :)

 

[ElieG12]

Faith in Jesus is precisely the confidence we have that all the mistakes we are continually making because we cannot control the behavior we have (whether due to genetics, the local culture in which we were raised, the education we received, by the direct influence of others who corrupt us, by the condition of the world that Satan rules, or for any other reason) will be forgiven and overlooked as we do our best to do the right things and stand for the truth.

We have complete confidence that Jesus sacrificed himself so that we have a clear conscience and can have peace in our sinful condition, and also, trust that the time will come when we have total control of our actions, because we will have matured enough and we will have been educated appropriately by God Himself about how to behave in the proper way, the way God considers appropriate for ourselves. He wants the best for us.

So faith in Jesus, our present sinful nature as imperfect humans, total self-control of our behavior, and the sacrifice of Jesus are inextricably associated with each other.

 

[PGS11]

The old testament is in the bible to show Jesus as a decedent of Adam that's why you see whole books to who begot who in the bible the lineage has to be there.Also for the books of Prophets who foretell the coming of Christ.Genesis tells you why Jesus Came it has to be there.I do see problems in Genesis we assume Adam and Eve where the first two and only people but that can't be true how does Cain start a city are they all his children? There had to be others or the numbers don't add up.I believe Adam and Eve where the first of the Israelite blood line that produces Christ chosen by God but did not call themselves that.I say that only because its impossible for all these cities to exist in such a short time coming from only 2 people.The numbers just don't add up should I ignore that.

 

[ScottA]

This point causes me a massive amount of cognitive dissonance. (something most won't admit)

The gospel and the New Testament narrative unravel when these things aren't literal.

- The geologies are meaningless. (or in serious error)
- Who wrote the Books of Moses? (and when)
- If Adam wasn't a literal human then he didn't literally sin.
- If Adam didn't literally sin, then there is no original sin.
- If there is no original sin then being born in Adam's race does not make you a sinner.
- If we are not redeemed from original sin by Christ's payment of the death penalty...
- Then the Atonement was of none effect.
- If the Atonement was of none effect, we are lost in our sin and awaiting judgment of our works.
- We all fall short of the perceived standard (the glory of God) and stand condemned.
- Faith in Christ can't help us, the Atonement is null and void. (as outlined above)
- Where does that leave us?

Alternatively:
- There is anecdotal evidence (and in some cases historical evidence) that faith in Christ can help us.
- And that a renewed relationship with the creator is possible. (assuming we were alienated prior)

But how can this be when church doctrine is a house of cards?
- Is a relationship with the creator of figment of our imagination? (wishful thinking?)
- Might we conjure up our own salvation to quell the fear of the unknown?

It's enough to drive one mad. (as my British friends might say)

I like what some atheists conclude.
Living your life as if there might be a God works better than living your life as if there isn't a God, (just in case?) - LOL

]

What is written is true, but stipulations were also given:

• From the beginning the very elements that we and all the universe are made up of, God refers to our own make up as a form of "image." Meaning, that since we are made up of the dust of the earth which Peter clearly stated were to burned up and destroyed, then surely we and the world are but an image of God's revealing for the sake of "leading us unto all truth" as Jesus said.
• Paul then, referring also to what we see made manifest visually by God, furthered the image idea and analogy for our understanding, saying it is as looking "in a mirror, dimly", as if only a partial, obscured, or limited image.

As such, although God has been clear with the biblical narrative as being true as stated, it was always and intentionally, a mere sketch. Therefore, we should not trouble ourselves with "what if" scenarios. I would even say that as such, whether the narrative is considered allegory or not hardly matters, as the purpose was rather to simply illustrate His revelation to all of humanity.

Even so, it is good to question why God would allow for varying narratives to develop. The answer, Moses gave to Israel, and Jesus gave to Christendom...as a fork in the path with one path leading to death and the other leading to life (Deu 30:19, Mat 16:17).

 

[St. SteVen]

This isn't a logical argument. Adam can be a way of describing or illustrating mankind's original sin without being a literal individual person.

What about the biblical geologies? See verse 38 below.

Luke 3:23-38 NRSVue
Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli, 24 son of Matthat, son of Levi, son of Melchi, son of Jannai, son of Joseph, 25 son of Mattathias, son of Amos, son of Nahum, son of Esli, son of Naggai, 26 son of Maath, son of Mattathias, son of Semein, son of Josech, son of Joda, 27 son of Joanan, son of Rhesa, son of Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, son of Neri, 28 son of Melchi, son of Addi, son of Cosam, son of Elmadam, son of Er, 29 son of Joshua, son of Eliezer, son of Jorim, son of Matthat, son of Levi, 30 son of Simeon, son of Judah, son of Joseph, son of Jonam, son of Eliakim, 31 son of Melea, son of Menna, son of Mattatha, son of Nathan, son of David, 32 son of Jesse, son of Obed, son of Boaz, son of Sala,[a] son of Nahshon, 33 son of Amminadab, son of Admin, son of Arni,[b] son of Hezron, son of Perez, son of Judah, 34 son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham, son of Terah, son of Nahor, 35 son of Serug, son of Reu, son of Peleg, son of Eber, son of Shelah, 36 son of Cainan, son of Arphaxad, son of Shem, son of Noah, son of Lamech, 37 son of Methuselah, son of Enoch, son of Jared, son of Mahalaleel, son of Cainan, 38 son of Enos, son of Seth, son of Adam, son of God.

]

 

[Aunty Jane]

What do we make of so many conflicts with science? And even history. ???

When you examine the biblical accounts, there are things that many read right over and fail to acknowledge these details and what they indicate.

Genesis ch 1 for example gives no timeframe between the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the time of extensive preparation of this uninhabitable planet, which was in the “Goldilocks” position to host life. Everything about it was “just right”.....it’s placement to provide just the right amount of heat and light for things to grow....covered in the water...a miraculous substance that cannot be found on any other planets in our solar system, and which also promotes growth and life.
The speed of its rotation, its level of gravity and the correct mixture of gasses in the atmosphere that contains them, all contribute to the ability of life to be sustained, but not created as atheistic science wants to suggest. Life cannot be spontaneously generated....and so much preparation was needed before life could be sustained.

If oxygen levels were different for example.....too much oxygen would create an explosion if sparked, but too little would not allow us to light a fire or breathe.
If the vegetation did not produce oxygen by taking in the carbon dioxide that living things breathe out, then earth would run out of one of the most important elements in our existence.
Without photosynthesis from the sun, vegetation would die and so would the animals that feed on it...including us as we were all created to be vegetarians.

Evaporation too sustains the water cycle.....on an earth covered by salt water, the evaporation of water from the ocean, turns it into a drinkable state for land dwelling animals to live. This too is a perpetual cycle.

Earth is just the right distance from the sun in this one tiny solar system, in this one galaxy among billions in a vast universe. In the big picture, this is a strange choice to begin the creation of life...living, breathing creatures made of matter...the elements of creation itself put together in amazing complexity that could only have been designed.

What possible reason could the Creator have had in his choices?
The Bible is the only reference we have, and when it speaks about creation, it does so with the knowledge and experience of those who lived in that era. It does not go into scientific detail because the readers would not have understood it anyway....yet what was provided was the order in which the Creator carried out his project. An order that science basically agrees with.

Then we come to the age of the earth itself, and science then departs from any agreement with Scripture.
But does the Bible really disagree with science, or is it that interpretation of the Bible disagrees with science.
YEC believers have insisted that the Genesis account backs up a young earth? But does it?
Because there is no timeframe between Gen 1:1 and what follows, it is assumed that these events were close together......but the Creator is not limited by time. If there was a huge time difference between Gen 1:1 and the preparation of the earth that followed then the earth itself could be the billions of years old that science claims. What cannot be ascertained with true accuracy is the existence of humankind before the eras indicated in the Bible.
The creative days themselves could each have been millions of years long which would explain a lot discovered in the fossil record. Calling them “days” to the recipients of scripture simply indicated a process that one creative period followed another like the days naturally do.....so why can we believe that the days were not 24 hour periods? Because of the language used in Genesis......it says of each “day”....“there was evening and morning” for each creative period. A day for Jews began at sundown and concluded at sundown the following day. The fact that each “day” started with an evening is in keeping with their accounting of time, but it ended with a “morning”, which was not.

The “morning” was the dawn of a new day in creation......and a whole new set of accomplishments that God acknowledged with the completion of each period to his satisfaction, having finished the allotted tasks planned for each “day”.
Creation came about in increments of time, planned, carried out, and evaluated as each task was completed in order.

There is so much in the details that many people miss, especially now when we understand the complexity of every part of the process.....Jehovah is a wise Creator....not a magician.

Archeologists say there is no evidence of the Israelites being in Egypt, the Exodus, wanderings or conquest of Canaan.

There is evidence, but Egypt particularly, was not averse to leaving out of their history, anything that hinted of a defeat. They proudly boasted of their victories but did not apparently record their defeats. The biblical account of Pharaoh’s ignominious death along with his entire army, would be reason enough to remain silent.

As for evidence of their wandering in the wilderness.....God made provision for them so that what they had never wore out, so not much to leave behind if God preserved everything they used. They were fed and watered miraculously. Their clothing and footwear were preserved for the entire period.

Since God was the power in their conquest of the Canaanites, what evidence would be needed?
Archeology has uncovered such sordid relics of the Canaanite civilisation, that some have commented that they were surprised that God let them live as long as they did.