Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
73 online now:
AZPaul3, PaulK, vimesey (3 members, 70 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,164 Year: 4,276/6,534 Month: 490/900 Week: 14/182 Day: 2/12 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 11 of 1482 (782435)
04-23-2016 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by ICANT
04-23-2016 2:28 AM


ICANT writes:

Genesis 1:1 Does not say the heaven and the earth were created at the same moment. It just says they were created in the beginning.

If that is the position you take then it is simply worthless data with almost no value whatsoever.

The only value is that it is a great example of the common practice of the Christian Cult of Ignorance folk identifying themselves as "Biblical Christians" of quote mining, taking a single line out of context and trying to sell it as whole cloth.

The reality though is that the quote is part of a statement said to happen during a single first day.

That of course is patently false.

AbE:

Science (and reality instead of myth) on the other hand can actually provide understanding and additional information that simply cannot be discovered in any Bible stories. Science can tell us that the beginning of this universe was at least 14.5 Billion Years ago and that the beginning of this earth was about 4.5 Billion years ago and that it has NOT grown to this size but was about the same size from very close to it's beginning.

Edited by jar, : see AbE: hit submit instead of preview.

Edited by jar, : follow Admin's ruling


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2016 2:28 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Admin, posted 04-23-2016 9:46 AM jar has taken no action
 Message 16 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2016 6:09 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 18 of 1482 (782458)
04-23-2016 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by ICANT
04-23-2016 6:09 PM


ICANT writes:

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

This text says they were created in one light period.

When you consider God's definition of a day it is entirely possible.

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

A light period is God's definition of a day. Regardless of the duration of that light period.

Nonsense, a light period is defined as an evening and a morning. The writers (and God played no part in writing the myth) defined it as a day.

The truth and reality though is that the writers were simply ignorant had did not even understand the basics of what caused night and day.

The text says they were created between the evening and the morning of the first day.

Only by once again dishonestly quote mining the text and taking lines out of context can you support your assertion.

And even if your assertion was true it is simply worthless data. As I pointed out the Bible provides us NO information of value where science actually can. Science can tell us times and duration and not utterly worthless imaginings like one light period.

Edited by jar, : gotta make that preview button bigger


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2016 6:09 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2016 9:07 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 22 of 1482 (782462)
04-23-2016 9:31 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by ICANT
04-23-2016 9:07 PM


ICANT writes:

How many light periods was there in the first billion years of the existence of the universe?

Now that again is a really stupid, stupid, stupid question; as silly as the concept of God's light period; something of no worth, value or meaning?

There is no such thing as a light period unless referenced to a particular location, which if you had ever read the Bible you would understand since a primary job of the local rabbi was to determine the local light period.

Your question is a classic example of the utter worthlessness of "Biblical Science".


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2016 9:07 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2016 9:39 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 25 of 1482 (782465)
04-23-2016 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by ICANT
04-23-2016 9:39 PM


what gets created in Genesis 1
ICANT writes:

How many light periods was there in the first billion years of the existence of the universe?

You are free to take my answer any fool way you want but actually I do have a clue and in fact did more than offer a clue, I explained why your question was really, really, really stupid.

But neither the younger Genesis 1 story or the much earlier Genesis 2&3 stories are about creation. Creation, like the God characters in the fables is simply a plot device. The many things in each of the stories that are simply false should be enough to let anyone realize they were fables and not to be taken as true or factual.

For example, in Genesis 1 there is the bit about the two great lights, one to rule the day and the other to rule the night. Now granted, the authors were ignorant of what made the "light" and so thought the moon actually was a light, but even as ignorant as they were they knew that the moon did not follow the pattern of a lightened day and a darkened night. It did not rule the night and was often absent from the night.

The moon sometimes showed up during the day, sometimes did not show up during either night or day and changed shape, unlike the sun.

Genesis 1 is NOT about God or Creation of the Heavens and the Earth but rather about the creation of ritual. The only creation found in Genesis 1 is the creation of the sacred week and the concept of the Sabbath.

Edited by jar, : fix sub-title


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2016 9:39 PM ICANT has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Admin, posted 04-24-2016 9:14 AM jar has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 30 of 1482 (782477)
04-24-2016 9:57 AM


On why "God's light period" is a worthless content free concept.
ICANT has claimed that God defined a "Light Period" as when there was light. (actually that is not what the Genesis 1 story says, in that fable the god character calls the light period "day" and the dark period as "night" and never defines a light period.

ICANT writes:

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

A light period is God's definition of a day. Regardless of the duration of that light period.

In the fable it is the story teller who define a day as the evening and the morning; note the lower case showing duration and generality as opposed to the upper case "Day" that signifies a personal name.

But as ICANT rightly points out there is no duration defined. A light period on some spot on the earth would be approximately 12 hours while a light period on some spot on the moon would be approximately 14 earth days and a light period on a spot on Mercury would have a light period of about 59 Earth days.

Since "God's light period" is a term without any real meaning independent of a particular location asking "How many light periods was there in the first billion years of the existence of the universe?" as ICANT did in Message 20 is simply a really, really, really silly question with no possible answer and with no informational content.

Genesis 1 is NOT about creation of the universe but rather creation of a ritual.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by ICANT, posted 04-24-2016 10:03 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 42 of 1482 (782504)
04-25-2016 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by ICANT
04-24-2016 10:03 PM


Re: On why "God's light period" is a worthless content free concept.
ICANT writes:

Day = light therefore light = day.

But that is not what the story says. The story says that an evening and a morning = a day.

Light is named Day. The Dark was named Night. but an evening and a morning was a day.

ICANT writes:

Therefore a period of light regardless of the duration not intrupted by a period of darkness regardless of the duration of said darkness = a light period.

But that is not what the story says. It says a period of light not interrupted by darkness is named Day.

Your definition really is worthless. How long is a light period? As long as it lasts. Wooppdy Do!

Look at the verse you quoted.

quote:
Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And you are still taking stuff out of context, quote mining, perverting the Bible.

By the way, you do know that the CMB was not discovered by its light but by its noise. The CMB is a period of static. No light period!

For there to actually be a "light period" there has to be a delineation, something that sets some limit.

If you want to claim that the Earth was made during a period of light then of course, since the Earth is a body that revolves around the Sun then yes it was created when there was light.

BUT that is only so superficially true for the heavens (the authors of Genesis 1 had no concept of universe comparable to our concept of universe) as to again be worthless. They did not know or understand that stars were just like the Sun or even that light was produced by the sun. That's why they made the error of thinking that the moon was a light.

By the time the Earth was created the light from the Big Bang was long gone, faded to the current CMB. The Earth was not created in the light from the Big Bang and in fact most of the heavens was created after the light from the Big Bang was long gone. And what we see of the heavens is the light that those stars produce.

No, there is no science in Genesis 1 and the only thing created in Genesis 1 is ritual.

Edited by jar, : left out two words and appalin spallin


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by ICANT, posted 04-24-2016 10:03 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2016 6:45 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 46 of 1482 (782541)
04-25-2016 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by ICANT
04-25-2016 6:45 PM


Re: On why "God's light period" is a worthless content free concept.
No, a period of light does not equal a day, sorry but that was not true when the Genesis 1 story was written and is not true even today. A day is composed of a light and dark period according to the story.

ICANT writes:

But according to YEC'S and some who have posted in this thread the sun did not exist until the fourth day.

But since the sun and moon is part of the heavens they were created during the day the heavens and the earth were created.

According to Genesis 1 the Sun and Moon were not created until day four and were not created during that first day. It has nothing to do with YECs but rather what the story says.

The authors were too ignorant to know that the sun and moon were part of the heavens just as they were ignorant of what caused light.

But we can know even now that there is no science in Genesis 1 and the only thing created in Genesis 1 is ritual. We can read what was written and test it against reality.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2016 6:45 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2016 10:21 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 58 of 1482 (782570)
04-26-2016 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by ICANT
04-25-2016 10:21 PM


Re: On why "God's light period" is a worthless content free concept.
ICANT writes:

Are you saying God was lying when He called the light DAY?

No, I am not saying that the god character in the story was lying when he called the Light Day as I have already explained to you several times in this thread. The god character in Genesis 2&3 does lie but this god character does not lie in that statement.

The God character is naming the light Day in the fable. Not defining some light period of a day, but rather when we would call daytime today. As is shown in your very quote an evening and a morning is a day, the period starting as the Night comes on and running through to the next Day. A day is not a period of light but rather a period of dark followed by light.

This is really important since the concept of what makes a day (and then the sacred week) is the real purpose of the myth. The definition of a day beginning with darkness not light and running through the night that on the seventh day the God character takes a break is the creation of the Jewish week and of the Sabbath.

Genesis 1 is the creation myth for the Sabbath and that is all.

Gen 1 writes:

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

The first sun and the moon get mentioned in the story in Gen 1:16. Now if you want to quibble and say that made and create are not synonymous you are free to do so.

But the important part is the fact that a day starts at the coming of darkness, of Night, not as we see it beginning with the coming of light; and that the week is divided into seven days (not five or ten or any other number) and that the seventh day is different and a time when no work is done.

But since the only thing that really gets created in Genesis 1 is the ritual, it does not much matter what was done when. All that matters is that there are six work days and one day of rest.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2016 10:21 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by ICANT, posted 04-26-2016 5:59 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 60 of 1482 (782628)
04-26-2016 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by ICANT
04-26-2016 5:59 PM


what Genesis 1 is all about.
We do not know when evening comes but we do know that evening begins a day according to the story.

I'm just telling you what the story YOU quoted says.

And if you want to quibble over whether made means created that too is fine. But the story says the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day. Neither was there before then. And the story tells us who did the making so it does not matter whether or not one term is limited to the god character in the story; the story itself tells us who was doing the work.

And that term "work" is what is important in Genesis 1 as I have pointed out to you before in this and other threads.

It does not matter whether the work is making or creating, the whole point of the Genesis 1 fable is that for six days the god character works and on the seventh day the god character kicks back and admires what he did all week.

What is created in Genesis 1 is the ritual Jewish week and the Sacred Sabbath and it is the justification for so many of the laws and traditions that defined being Hebrew.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by ICANT, posted 04-26-2016 5:59 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by ICANT, posted 04-26-2016 11:33 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 71 of 1482 (782659)
04-27-2016 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by ICANT
04-26-2016 11:33 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
ICANT writes:

Hi jar

jar writes:

What is created in Genesis 1 is the ritual Jewish week and the Sacred Sabbath and it is the justification for so many of the laws and traditions that defined being Hebrew.

jar I know that is what you believe but could you be specific and show me where the Sacred Sabbath is what was created?

God Bless,

I have explained that to you several times.

The fable is the justification for the Jewish week and the Sabbath. The whole of Genesis 1 through Genesis 2:4 is where the week and the Sabbath are created.

On each of six days the god character works and on the seventh day the god character does no work.

Each day begins with evening and runs trough the night and the next daylight or as it is named in the story "Day" But "a day" the period of time, is a Night and a Day.

The Jewish week is composed of seven days, each begins at sundown and runs until the next sundown. On six consecutive days Jews work but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, they can do no work.

That is all there is in Genesis 1.

There is no science. There are many factual errors. Some I have pointed out to you but there are errors in almost every day. The order of creation in the story is wrong. The Moon is not a light. The author(s) of the story were ignorant of what light even was. The heavens are not separate from what is in the heavens. The earth did not exist before the stars were placed in the sky. The errors simply go on and on.

The story only makes sense if viewed as being about the creation of a ritual just as the older Genesis 2&3 myth only makes sense when seen as a "Just So Story".

Trying to pretend the Genesis 1 fable is a factual scientific account denigrates the story and the authors, redactors and editors.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by ICANT, posted 04-26-2016 11:33 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 4:10 PM jar has replied
 Message 80 by kbertsche, posted 04-27-2016 11:42 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 75 of 1482 (782685)
04-27-2016 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by ICANT
04-27-2016 4:10 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
ICANT writes:

Genesis 1:2 through 2:3 is a remodeling of the original creation which had reached a condition described by Jeremiah in 4:23-26.

In case you had not noticed Jeremiah is an entirely different story written by entirely different folk and has absolutely nothing to do with what is actually written in Genesis 1.

Also, Genesis 2&3 are different stories written long before Genesis 1 and by a whole different culture and in it too Creation is just a plot device to tell a Just So story. Since it was written long, long before Genesis 1 it can't in any way describe what happened in Genesis 1.

The fact remains that Genesis 1 is as I described and what is created in Genesis 1 is simply ritual.

The fable is the justification for the Jewish week and the Sabbath. The whole of Genesis 1 through Genesis 2:4 is where the week and the Sabbath are created.

On each of six days the god character works and on the seventh day the god character does no work.

Each day begins with evening and runs trough the night and the next daylight or as it is named in the story "Day" But "a day" the period of time, is a Night and a Day.

The Jewish week is composed of seven days, each begins at sundown and runs until the next sundown. On six consecutive days Jews work but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, they can do no work.

That is all there is in Genesis 1.

There is no science. There are many factual errors. Some I have pointed out to you but there are errors in almost every day. The order of creation in the story is wrong. The Moon is not a light. The author(s) of the story were ignorant of what light even was. The heavens are not separate from what is in the heavens. The earth did not exist before the stars were placed in the sky. The errors simply go on and on.

The story only makes sense if viewed as being about the creation of a ritual just as the older Genesis 2&3 myth only makes sense when seen as a "Just So Story".

Trying to pretend the Genesis 1 fable is a factual scientific account denigrates the story and the authors, redactors and editors.

It is a shame that Christianity has tried to create the impression that the Bible (any of the different Canons) is actually one book with some consistent purpose. It's not. Trying to claim that Jeremiah is in anyway related to Genesis 1 or that Genesis 2&3 are related in anyway to Genesis 1 other than by being stories selected by a committee of Canon is doing the Bible a great disservice.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 4:10 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 10:11 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 87 of 1482 (782732)
04-28-2016 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by ICANT
04-27-2016 10:11 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
ICANT writes:

At what time was the earth in the condition described in Jeremiah 4:23-26 according to the Bible?

According to the Bible that state that exists in Jeremiah 4:23-26 only exists in that passage and it is not referring to a beginning but a threatened ending, a period of destruction.

That is the great error of quote mining, to loose context and meaning. That passage itself shows it is not referring to Genesis 1 since it talks of cities being torn down and fruitful places made desolate.

The passage goes on:

quote:
27 For thus hath the Lord said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.

28 For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black; because I have spoken it, I have purposed it, and will not repent, neither will I turn back from it.

29 The whole city shall flee for the noise of the horsemen and bowmen; they shall go into thickets, and climb up upon the rocks: every city shall be forsaken, and not a man dwell therein.

30 And when thou art spoiled, what wilt thou do? Though thou clothest thyself with crimson, though thou deckest thee with ornaments of gold, though thou rentest thy face with painting, in vain shalt thou make thyself fair; thy lovers will despise thee, they will seek thy life.

31 For I have heard a voice as of a woman in travail, and the anguish as of her that bringeth forth her first child, the voice of the daughter of Zion, that bewaileth herself, that spreadeth her hands, saying, Woe is me now! for my soul is wearied because of murderers.


The Bible is not one book, not one story but an anthology of anthologies and should not be treated as one thing with one purpose.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 10:11 PM ICANT has seen this message

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(2)
Message 88 of 1482 (782733)
04-28-2016 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by kbertsche
04-27-2016 11:42 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
kb writes:

jar writes:

That is all there is in Genesis 1.


I disagree; there's a LOT more in the text than this!

For one thing, there is a strong polemic against pagan sun and moon gods. After the strong emphasis on "naming" things in the first three days, the sun and moon are buried in the middle of the account (on day 4) and are NOT named, but just described as the "greater" and the "lesser" lights. This "dissing" of the sun and moon stresses the fact that they are merely created objects, not deities.

You are right; I should have said, as I have in other posts in this thread, "That is all that is created in Genesis 1."

And you raise a good point, one I have tried to make many times here at EvC when dealing with Genesis 1 as well as Genesis 2&3, there are other important things in the stories. Your point about the sun and moon not being named is a great example. There is also the god described in Genesis 1 that is entirely different than the God found in the earlier Genesis 2&3 tale. The god character in Genesis 1 is far more sophisticated then the somewhat bumbling god of Genesis 2&3; it is supremely competent, creating by thought alone, overarching, methodical, sure, but also aloof, apart and not interacting with the creation.

I have long been fascinated by two facts, that the younger story was placed first and that no attempt was made to make the two creation myths jib. I have reached a tentative conclusion on those issues but that may be better in another thread.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by kbertsche, posted 04-27-2016 11:42 PM kbertsche has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Aussie, posted 04-28-2016 2:34 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 94 of 1482 (782769)
04-28-2016 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Aussie
04-28-2016 2:34 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
I posted "I have long been fascinated by two facts, that the younger story was placed first and that no attempt was made to make the two creation myths jib. I have reached a tentative conclusion on those issues but that may be better in another thread." but I will post a short summary here.

The Bible is as I have said an anthology of anthologies, a collection and accumulation of tales from evolving cultures and eras influenced by politics both local, regional and international. The stories themselves evolved as the cultures evolved from individual independent tribes to proto-States to Nations to several periods of being vassals and to the status of just one religion primarily located in one Roman Province.

For much of the history there were two separate nations claiming to worship the same god each considering themselves to be the One True Hebrew nation.

The same story (the flood myth as an example) would be slightly different in Israel and in Judah.

There was a period (the Davidic Period) when the two nations were under the same Monarch (much as England and Scotland under James I & VI, one monarch but still two nations). At times like that there there would be pressure to meld both traditions into one but as always, political reality would play a part in how successful any such attempt might be. We can see signs of such efforts in the two mutually exclusive flood accounts found the Genesis 6 & 7 where both versions got mushed together with no attempt to fix the contradictions but as alternate accounts.

So over time the different tales that were the product of the particular mythos of a given era and political reality became set as accepted scripture. Once a version became generally accepted no matter how crude the redacting might have been, it became increasingly hard to make further changes.

As long as everything was still separate tales and scrolls all was fine but fast forward. By the time of the Exile some of the scrolls had been designated as Canonical, the Torah. Most likely this is sometime between 700 and 600 BCE and that by around 400BCE was pretty much (at least the written Torah) as we see it today.

It is that period, the change from individual tales and scrolls that stood alone to an organized collection (the Anthology version 1) that the order was established with a younger tale placed as Genesis 1 and a much older tale placed as Genesis 2&3.

So why that order?

Well, the very idea of a Jewish, Hebrew identity was being threatened in the cosmopolitan multicultural environment that was the Exile. People were being accepted as never before and so the priesthood felt a need for revival, reformation and an increased emphasis on what being Jewish meant.

The concept of a sacred week, a day defined as beginning at sundown and running through to the next sundown, of six days of work and one Holy Day of rest, prayer and thanksgiving is central to much of Judaism, one of the things like circumcision that set them as a people apart. In addition, the supreme god described in the story, all powerful, sure, competent is a great introduction to the character of the God they were marketing.

But then they move to the god found in Genesis 2&3 where the basics for the society are outlined in the Just So Story and they add to the character. The god here is personable, having direct interaction with the creation, very human, approachable.

The two stories set as they are provide an introduction to the more complex nature of a god than either story alone as well as an introduction to the sacred week and an explanation of why society would be built on a moral framework. The two stories set one right after the other also set the stage for the continuing struggle between man and man and man and god that makes up so much of the rest of the Old Testament.

By the time Christianity got around to trying to create its own Canon about three centuries after Jesus' death much of the Old Testament, the historical basis for Christianity, had been set for almost a millennium.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Aussie, posted 04-28-2016 2:34 PM Aussie has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 151 of 1482 (783096)
05-03-2016 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by NoNukes
05-03-2016 11:58 AM


Re: Implications of Gap Theory
The biggest implication of practices like Gap theory for me is that it makes the authors look really silly and the ultimate inspiration for the stories look really stupid.

When you have to take pieces parts of stories out of context to support your position it makes little sense. If the Bible was inspired by God was God incapable of inspiring writing that does not require a patchwork quilt of pieces parts to support what the God wanted communicated?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by NoNukes, posted 05-03-2016 11:58 AM NoNukes has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 05-05-2016 8:09 PM jar has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022