From
Message 32
It says "male and female he created them" Where does it say one each or two? Prior to that, it says him, but then modifies that with the specifics I quoted. It could be two as you say, or two hundred. God created man, but there is no reason that he had to limit himself to two.
It doesn't have to be two. Its talking about the Adam in Gen 1 where it could just mean "mankind".
It uses the same Hebrew word and even has the same context...
Gen 1:
quote:
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them,...
and Gen 5:
quote:
1This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Its obvious that they are referring to the same thing.
Gen 5:2 says the same thing, slightly reworded. Again, Adam is the first named, but The Bible allows that he might have been different from the man of Gen 1.
How can you maintain that in light of the above?
If they are the same, then yes, God only created two, and the Bible supports the Young Earth Creationists.
If you read the Bible literally, and assume inerrancy, then it
does support a young Earth.
From
Message 33
You are right, this is off the thread.
As long as I, or we, keep it tied to the original topic then it'll be okay.
My point is that teaching an interpretation that conflicts with science drives people away, shooting ourselves in the foot.
Right.
Teaching an interpretation that agrees with science avoids that. This is only reasonable if the interpretation is valid Biblically.
But then you're twisting God's Word into something else and either no longer reading literally or no longer maintaining inerrancy so you're shooting yourself in the foot in that regard.
Can we stop shooting ourselves in the foot with a solid interpretation?
No, either way you go about it, you are shooting yourself in the foot with believing in Creationism that derives from a literal and inerrant Bible.