Christians Should Mind Their Own Business

[Craigbythesea]

Not quite.

From ISBE:


(1) The Hebrew Conception
Above the spherical earth was stretched out the “firmament” (rāḳı̄a‛) made on the second day of creation to “divide the waters from the waters” (Gen 16). To the Hebrews the “firmament” was the apparent void above, in which clouds float and the lights of heaven pursue their appointed paths. The word rāḳı̄a‛, by its etymology, suggests an expanse, something stretched, spread or beaten out, as when Isaiah (Isa_40:22) says that the Lord “stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.” But the Greek word steréōma, by which the Septuagint rendered rāḳı̄a‛, gives the meaning of a firm and solid structure, and our translators have carried out this same idea in their English rendering of “firmament.”

[The "solid dome" error was caused by the mistranslation found in the LXX and denies both the etymology and philology of the Hebrew word.]

(2) The Alexandrian Conception
In this however the Septuagint simply expressed the astronomical science of their day as accepted in Alexandria, where the doctrine of a succession of solid crystalline spheres, each carrying a planet, held currency. But in order to express the Hebrew idea, rāḳı̄a‛ should be rendered “expanse” or “space”; it corresponds to the “empty space” of Job_26:7.

The author of this very brief article in the ISBE is either unaware of the data that proves that the point of view in the article is seriously incorrect, or has chosen to ignore the data. The article in the Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature is a much longer and detailed article (Vol. III, pp. 568-569 [two lengthy columns of fine print per page] on the word רָקִיעַ. Of special importance is the following from the article,

The verb רָקַע, raká, means to expand by beating, whether by the hand, the foot, or any instrument. It is especially used, however, of beating out metals into thin plates (Exod. xxxix, 3, Numb. xvi, 39), and hence the substantive רַקֻּעַים “broad plates” of metal (Numb. 16:38). (The italics are theirs).​

Therefore, your comment enclosed in brackets is incorrect—the translation in the LXX is a correct translation of the Hebrew! The Latin Vulgate translates the Hebrew,

Gen. 1:7. et fecit Deus firmamentum divisitque aquas quae erant sub firmamento ab his quae erant super firmamentum et factum est ita

Firmamentum is the Latin word for ‘support’! And indeed, that support, the dome, would have to be immensely strong to hold up the weight of the water above it—enough water to cover even Mount Everest! (Just one gallon of water weighs approximately 8.35 lb (about 3.785 kg).

 

[TCassidy]

The Latin Vulgate translates the Hebrew,

Yes, the Vulgate perpetuates the error from the LXX.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Yes, the Vulgate perpetuates the error from the LXX.

 

[Deacon]

The word in question occurs 17 times in OT scripture; 9 in Genesis 1, 5 in Ezekiel 1 and 10, and once each in Ps 19:2, 150:1; and Dan 12:3.

It is difficult to establish a precise meaning for this noun based on usage, the context doesn't provide much help.

John Walton writes:

The verb rqʿ, from which the noun is derived, occurs 11 times in four different conjugations. The Qal (Isa 42:5, 44:24; Ps 136:6; Ezek 6:11; 25:6; 2 Sam 22:43) is used idiomatically of stamping one’s feet or, specifically in cosmic contexts (Isaiah and Psalms), of spreading out the earth on the waters. Note that these references to the cosmos offer a different view from Genesis 1, where the dry land emerges, rather than God’s spreading it out over the waters. The (Piel) occurrences (Exod 39:3; Num 17:4[16:39]; Isa 40:19; Jer 10:9) concern metalworking, particularly hammering out thin pieces of gold or silver for plating. The single Hiphil occurrence (Job 37:18) draws the cosmic context together with a metalworking metaphor: “Can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze?” (niv) In all of its permutations, the verbal root expresses the action of flattening out. Nevertheless, it is important to notice that, in the single occurrence of the verb to describe cosmic activity in the heavens (Job 37:18), it is not the rāqīʿa that is spread out but the šĕḥāqîm.
Walton, J. H. (2011). Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology (p. 156). Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

See more: THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE, Part I: The Meaning of raqiac in Gen 1:6-8
by Paul H. Seely [LINK]

Rob​

 

[Craigbythesea]

The word in question occurs 17 times in OT scripture; 9 in Genesis 1, 5 in Ezekiel 1 and 10, and once each in Ps 19:2, 150:1; and Dan 12:3.

It is difficult to establish a precise meaning for this noun based on usage, the context doesn't provide much help.

John Walton writes:

The verb rqʿ, from which the noun is derived, occurs 11 times in four different conjugations. The Qal (Isa 42:5, 44:24; Ps 136:6; Ezek 6:11; 25:6; 2 Sam 22:43) is used idiomatically of stamping one’s feet or, specifically in cosmic contexts (Isaiah and Psalms), of spreading out the earth on the waters. Note that these references to the cosmos offer a different view from Genesis 1, where the dry land emerges, rather than God’s spreading it out over the waters. The (Piel) occurrences (Exod 39:3; Num 17:4[16:39]; Isa 40:19; Jer 10:9) concern metalworking, particularly hammering out thin pieces of gold or silver for plating. The single Hiphil occurrence (Job 37:18) draws the cosmic context together with a metalworking metaphor: “Can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze?” (niv) In all of its permutations, the verbal root expresses the action of flattening out. Nevertheless, it is important to notice that, in the single occurrence of the verb to describe cosmic activity in the heavens (Job 37:18), it is not the rāqīʿa that is spread out but the šĕḥāqîm.
Walton, J. H. (2011). Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology (p. 156). Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

See more: THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE, Part I: The Meaning of raqiac in Gen 1:6-8
by Paul H. Seely [LINK]

Rob​

It appears to me that the very article for which you provided a link contradicts to a significant extent the conclusion drawn in your post. Nonetheless—thank you for the link. I had not been aware of that particular article.

 

[dad1]

Religion is not science and science is not religion. Christians should not be busybodies.

Seems clear to me, Rev.

Actually there is far greater truth and knowledge in the bible than modern science. Also a large large part of modern so called science is not science but godless philosophy, methodology, and religious twaddle.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Actually there is far greater truth and knowledge in the bible than modern science. Also a large large part of modern so called science is not science but godless philosophy, methodology, and religious twaddle.

These statements not only show a lack of knowledge of English grammar, but they also manifest an inexcusable lack of knowledge of both the Bible and science.

 

[dad1]

These statements not only show a lack of knowledge of English grammar, but they also manifest an inexcusable lack of knowledge of both the Bible and science.

False. The statements were true as true ever was. So called science is a pathetic joke that issues false prophesies and lies about creation. If you want real science look to God's word.

Example: The continental separation. The real timing of that requires a knowledge of Scripture.

 

[JonC]

Actually there is far greater truth and knowledge in the bible than modern science. Also a large large part of modern so called science is not science but godless philosophy, methodology, and religious twaddle.

Absolutely, the operative subject being "far greater truth and knowledge." God has made foolish the wisdom of the world, and they are without knowledge.

 

[Craigbythesea]

False. The statements were true as true ever was. So called science is a pathetic joke that issues false prophesies and lies about creation. If you want real science look to God's word.

Example: The continental separation. The real timing of that requires a knowledge of Scripture.

The study, teaching, and application of the Scriptures as a pastor and as a teacher of the Scriptures has been my life’s work ever since my career change more than 20 years ago from being a research biologist. Nowhere in the Scriptures do we find any indication of any kind of the age of the earth. Moreover, nearly all Old Testament scholars researching and publishing today in peer-reviewed academic biblical journals on the Scriptures teach that Genesis 1-11 is a severely redacted collection of epic tales, sagas, myths, or legends. They teach this because the evidence supporting this view is so substantial that most of them would say that it is conclusive. Indeed, Genesis 1-11 is written in a genre of literature that is not found elsewhere in the Bible, a genre of literature markedly different from the historical narrative in which most of the rest of the Hextateuch is written.

The fact that the flood did not occur proves that we have in Genesis an epic tale. The fact that the tower of Babble is a fictional story proves that we have in Genesis another epic tale. The fact that we have in Gen. 1-11 two differing creation stories proves that we have in Genesis two differing epic tales that have been edited into Genesis 1-11. What did the Book of Genesis read like before these stories were edited into it? We have no copies of Genesis that are early enough to answer that question.


The Bible describes, in detail and in many places, the earth as being a disk covered by a dome. The Bible describes a world-wide flood through which eight humans and hundreds of thousands of land animals were kept alive by a big boat while pretending that hundreds of thousands of kinds of marine life survived without so much as a lifejacket! The Bible describes a world-wide flood through which eight humans and hundreds of thousands of land animals were kept alive by a big boat while pretending that the ecosystems necessary for the survival of the humans and animals after the flood remained in tact without so much as a single miracle. The Bible describes Nimrod and his people building a tower out of bricks held together by bitumen in the land of Shinar—a tower to be so tall that it would reach beyond the dome into heaven. God becomes so alarmed by this that He and unspecified other persons go down to the earth from heaven and make Nimrod’s people forget how to speak Hebrew but know how to speak languages that had hitherto not existed. The trouble was, of course, that each individual could now understand only one of these newly created languages. This was supposed to make building tall towers and doing grand things impossible when in fact it was not a significant hindrance. Why didn’t one of the persons that went down to the earth with God tell Him that the plan would not work and that in the future the tallest buildings would be built by men and women speaking a wide spectrum of languages but still finding ways to communicate with each other?

Personally, I find it more than a little unsettling that some people believe that God was not allowed to communicate with us using epic tales, sagas, myths and/or legends. If God was not allowed to communicate in the manner that He chose to, was He really God?


Isa. 40:22. It is he who sits above the circle of the earth,
and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers;
who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
and spreads them like a tent to live in; (NRSV)

This verse does NOT say that the earth is a circle! It says that the LORD sits upon the circle of the earth—the dome over the flat earth that had, before the Genesis flood, separated the oceans from the mass of water above the dome:

Gen. 6:6. And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
7. So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so.
8. God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.
9. And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so.
10. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. (NRSV)

Gen. 7:11. In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.
12. The rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. (NRSV)

Moreover, only a flat earth has four corners:

Isa. 11:12. He will raise a signal for the nations,
and will assemble the outcasts of Israel,
and gather the dispersed of Judah
from the four corners of the earth. (NRSV)

Rev.7:1. After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth so that no wind could blow on earth or sea or against any tree. (NRSV)

The literal four corners of the earth in the Bible gave rise to today’s popular expression.

Furthermore, Jesus was able to see all the kingdoms of the world from “a very high mountain.” This would have been impossible on a spherical earth:

Matt. 4:8. Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor; (NRSV)

Notice that Matthew states that the mountain was “very high,” realizing that for Jesus to see over all of the mountains in the region, the mountain that Jesus was on would have to be very high! Obviously, Matthew rejected proof from science that the earth was spherical, and was faithful to the word of God in the Old Testament which expressly teaches that the earth is flat and covered with a dome.

In Daniel 4:11, we read of a tree so tall that it could be seen from all over the flat earth,

11. The tree grew great and strong,
its top reached to heaven,
and it was visible to the ends of the whole earth.

In Job 38:22-23 we read of the storehouses of the snow, and the storehouses of hail, which God has reserved “for the time of trouble,”

22. “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow,
or have you seen the storehouses of the hail,
23. which I have reserved for the time of trouble,
for the day of battle and war?”

In these verses, God Himself is speaking to Job in the context of Hebrew cosmology:

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/gre13.htm

Centuries before Christ, Greek scholars taught that the earth was a sphere, but first century Christians still believed in the ancient Hebrew cosmology of the Old Testament—and the New Testament reflects that point of view in Matt. 4:8 and Revelation 7:1. Unfortunately, Christians, with reinforcement from the New Testament, continued to believe that the earth was flat until the Middle Ages when they began to realize that in matters of science, science must be allowed to prevail. Today, over 99.99% of all Christians accept the proof from science that the earth is not flat, but spherical. Moreover, the very large majority of Christians today accept the proof from science that Kangaroos did not hop from Australia to Noah’ Ark, and that penguins did not fly there from Antarctica!

The Bible in the inspired word of God, but it must be taken into account that the Bible is not a college text book—and it was never intended to be one. It was given to us to serve a spiritual purpose, and not to contradict the fact that the earth is 4.54 billion years old. For an excellent article from a Christian perspective, please see the following:

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

 

[Revmitchell]

Why Take Genesis Seriously?

The first eleven chapters of the Bible have been relegated by many to the category of myths, not real history. These are said to contain spiritual truth, but they cannot be taken seriously as records of real people and events. Many sincere Christians who believe the Bible do not know what their pastors believe about the historicity of Genesis. Is it safe to assume that these believe in the following truths?

1. God created everything in six 24-hour days.
2. Adam and Eve were real people.
3. God cursed a perfect world as a judgment for sin.
4. Noah constructed an Ark by which two of every kind of air-breathing, land-dwelling animal were saved along with Noah's family from a global flood.
5. The confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel produced the language groups that are found around the world today.

An alarming number of Christian leaders and teachers instead believe that God "created" through evolutionary processes over millions of years, that Adam and Eve descended from a hominid population, and that there has never been a global flood, suggesting that the account of Noah and the Ark is a story adapted from a Babylonian myth.

Mainstream Christian orthodoxy regarded the opening chapters of Genesis as just as real and reliable as the rest of the Bible until 150-200 years ago. So what has happened?

This downgrading of the early chapters of Genesis has coincided with the rise of uniformitarian philosophy as the cornerstone of modern geology and of evolution as the core of modern biology. Christians have been ignorant of the process that has gradually changed their whole approach to the Bible. Consequently, Christian churches throughout the world reject the early chapters of Genesis as history, resulting in all manner of compromise intended to force geological ages and organic evolution into the Scriptures. Many Christians have shelved this apparent conflict as being divisive, too difficult to resolve, or irrelevant to the Christian faith.

Genesis as Reliable History

Yet the conflict still rages. What makes it more intense is that in the ranks of those Christians who have not compromised the historicity of Genesis are many scientists with doctoral degrees from the modern education system.

The Creation Science Movement in Great Britain and the Creation Research Society, which now boasts a membership of over 600 individuals with graduate degrees in science, have sought to remain faithful to accepting Genesis as reliable history. The Institute for Creation Research employed scientists with Ph.D.s to work full-time in creationist research, writing, and teaching. Other creationist groups were subsequently formed so that today there are creationist organizations in all corners of the globe.

So why would thousands of highly-trained scientists not only believe Genesis to be reliable history, but base their scientific research on the details and implications of that history? It stems foremost from their Christian convictions.

The Bible never claims to be a textbook on history or science, but if God is who He claims to be, then He has all knowledge and power, and never makes mistakes. Therefore, if the Bible is the Word of God, then it must be truthful, even when it touches upon matters of history and science. Otherwise, this Creator God is a liar. The very character of God requires the first eleven chapters of Genesis to be a trustworthy record.

The subsequent pages of Genesis recount the early history of the nation of Israel, beginning with Abraham. Few conservative Christian scholars would deny the historicity of these later chapters in Genesis. Yet many regard the creation account as a form of ancient Hebrew poetry, even though the genre throughout the first eleven chapters of Genesis is no different to that used in the remainder of the book. The conflict occurs not with the language but with the supposed scientific facts that insist on a multi-billion-year-old earth and organic evolution. A choice has to be made between Scripture, which is authored by God, and modern science, authored by men.

Liberal Christian scholars insist that Genesis was written perhaps as late as the post-Babylonian exile. But such claims overlook that in the pre-Flood world, people built cities, had tools of brass and iron, and made musical instruments. In Genesis 5, the record of Adam ends with the expression "this is the book of the generations of Adam." There is no reason to suppose that Adam and his descendants were not able to write and keep records, remembering that on the sixth day of creation Adam named all the animals, thus demonstrating his intellectual capacity.

Moses, the traditionally recognized author of Genesis, simply had to compile the book of Genesis from the records kept by Adam and his descendants. Thus Genesis reads as eyewitness accounts.

If the Creator God of the Bible is who He says He is, then not only is He capable of accurately telling us about the early universe, the earth, and man, but He is capable of having the details truthfully recorded and transmitted through successive generations.

Jesus Regarded Genesis as Real History

If Jesus was (and is) both the Creator God and a perfect man, then His pronouncements are always and absolutely trustworthy. And Jesus referred directly to details in each of the first seven chapters of Genesis fifteen times. For example, Jesus referred to Genesis 1:26-27 when He said in Mark 10:6, "But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female." Man was created male and female "from the beginning of the creation," not after millions of years. In the very next verse, Jesus quotes directly fromGenesis 2:24 when He said, "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh." Five times Jesus refers to Noah and/or the destructive global Flood as real history. If He, as the Creator, was actually a witness to the events of Genesis 1-11, then we have no alternative but to regard these opening chapters of the Bible as reliable history.

http://www.icr.org/article/genesis-real-reliable-historical/

 

[dad1]

Absolutely, the operative subject being "far greater truth and knowledge." God has made foolish the wisdom of the world, and they are without knowledge.

Part of knowledge includes science. The root meaning for science is to know. Modern science guess, postulates, believes, prophesies, claims and makes stuff up.

 

[dad1]

Why Take Genesis Seriously?

The first eleven chapters of the Bible have been relegated by many to the category of myths, not real history. These are said to contain spiritual truth, but they cannot be taken seriously as records of real people and events. Many sincere Christians who believe the Bible do not know what their pastors believe about the historicity of Genesis. Is it safe to assume that these believe in the following truths?

1. God created everything in six 24-hour days.
2. Adam and Eve were real people.
3. God cursed a perfect world as a judgment for sin.
4. Noah constructed an Ark by which two of every kind of air-breathing, land-dwelling animal were saved along with Noah's family from a global flood.
5. The confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel produced the language groups that are found around the world today.

An alarming number of Christian leaders and teachers instead believe that God "created" through evolutionary processes over millions of years, that Adam and Eve descended from a hominid population, and that there has never been a global flood, suggesting that the account of Noah and the Ark is a story adapted from a Babylonian myth.

Mainstream Christian orthodoxy regarded the opening chapters of Genesis as just as real and reliable as the rest of the Bible until 150-200 years ago. So what has happened?

This downgrading of the early chapters of Genesis has coincided with the rise of uniformitarian philosophy as the cornerstone of modern geology and of evolution as the core of modern biology. Christians have been ignorant of the process that has gradually changed their whole approach to the Bible. Consequently, Christian churches throughout the world reject the early chapters of Genesis as history, resulting in all manner of compromise intended to force geological ages and organic evolution into the Scriptures. Many Christians have shelved this apparent conflict as being divisive, too difficult to resolve, or irrelevant to the Christian faith.

Genesis as Reliable History

Yet the conflict still rages. What makes it more intense is that in the ranks of those Christians who have not compromised the historicity of Genesis are many scientists with doctoral degrees from the modern education system.

The Creation Science Movement in Great Britain and the Creation Research Society, which now boasts a membership of over 600 individuals with graduate degrees in science, have sought to remain faithful to accepting Genesis as reliable history. The Institute for Creation Research employed scientists with Ph.D.s to work full-time in creationist research, writing, and teaching. Other creationist groups were subsequently formed so that today there are creationist organizations in all corners of the globe.

So why would thousands of highly-trained scientists not only believe Genesis to be reliable history, but base their scientific research on the details and implications of that history? It stems foremost from their Christian convictions.

The Bible never claims to be a textbook on history or science, but if God is who He claims to be, then He has all knowledge and power, and never makes mistakes. Therefore, if the Bible is the Word of God, then it must be truthful, even when it touches upon matters of history and science. Otherwise, this Creator God is a liar. The very character of God requires the first eleven chapters of Genesis to be a trustworthy record.

The subsequent pages of Genesis recount the early history of the nation of Israel, beginning with Abraham. Few conservative Christian scholars would deny the historicity of these later chapters in Genesis. Yet many regard the creation account as a form of ancient Hebrew poetry, even though the genre throughout the first eleven chapters of Genesis is no different to that used in the remainder of the book. The conflict occurs not with the language but with the supposed scientific facts that insist on a multi-billion-year-old earth and organic evolution. A choice has to be made between Scripture, which is authored by God, and modern science, authored by men.

Liberal Christian scholars insist that Genesis was written perhaps as late as the post-Babylonian exile. But such claims overlook that in the pre-Flood world, people built cities, had tools of brass and iron, and made musical instruments. In Genesis 5, the record of Adam ends with the expression "this is the book of the generations of Adam." There is no reason to suppose that Adam and his descendants were not able to write and keep records, remembering that on the sixth day of creation Adam named all the animals, thus demonstrating his intellectual capacity.

Moses, the traditionally recognized author of Genesis, simply had to compile the book of Genesis from the records kept by Adam and his descendants. Thus Genesis reads as eyewitness accounts.

If the Creator God of the Bible is who He says He is, then not only is He capable of accurately telling us about the early universe, the earth, and man, but He is capable of having the details truthfully recorded and transmitted through successive generations.

Jesus Regarded Genesis as Real History

If Jesus was (and is) both the Creator God and a perfect man, then His pronouncements are always and absolutely trustworthy. And Jesus referred directly to details in each of the first seven chapters of Genesis fifteen times. For example, Jesus referred to Genesis 1:26-27 when He said in Mark 10:6, "But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female." Man was created male and female "from the beginning of the creation," not after millions of years. In the very next verse, Jesus quotes directly fromGenesis 2:24 when He said, "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh." Five times Jesus refers to Noah and/or the destructive global Flood as real history. If He, as the Creator, was actually a witness to the events of Genesis 1-11, then we have no alternative but to regard these opening chapters of the Bible as reliable history.

http://www.icr.org/article/genesis-real-reliable-historical/

Great post.

 

[Revmitchell]

Part of knowledge includes science. The root meaning for science is to know. Modern science guess, postulates, believes, prophesies, claims and makes stuff up.

I agree science has become a tool to minimize scripture and kill God.

 

[dad1]

The study, teaching, and application of the Scriptures as a pastor and as a teacher of the Scriptures has been my life’s work ever since my career change more than 20 years ago from being a research biologist. Nowhere in the Scriptures do we find any indication of any kind of the age of the earth.

Well, we do find that the tribulation will last a certain time. Then that goes directly into the millennium. There are sudden differences in nature, like people living many many centuries, plants growing like crazy, lions eating grass, the heavens having folded up like a scroll, etc.

We also know that the past nature was similar in many ways! The long lives of Noah and the folks back then for example. We also know about when Noah lived! Jewish tradition even has Noah as a contemporary of Abraham.

Do you really think that the years before the flood are that mysterious in length? We have the record of who was the father of who and Adam is right there. The margin of opinion of ages is quite limited.

Moreover, nearly all Old Testament scholars researching and publishing today in peer-reviewed academic biblical journals on the Scriptures teach that Genesis 1-11 is a severely redacted collection of epic tales, sagas, myths, or legends.

Those that say that are in the dark. Jesus did not talk of that time in that way at all. Peer review? There are no peers here from that time. Don't be impressed by ignobigwigs, overrated doubters, and sickening compromisers..

They teach this because the evidence supporting this view is so substantial that most of them would say that it is conclusive. Indeed, Genesis 1-11 is written in a genre of literature that is not found elsewhere in the Bible, a genre of literature markedly different from the historical narrative in which most of the rest of the Hextateuch is written.

So what!!? That time is the most ancient.

The fact that the flood did not occur proves that we have in Genesis an epic tale.

It did occur. Don't make stuff up and present it as facts.

The fact that the tower of Babble is a fictional story proves that we have in Genesis another epic tale.

See above. Prove it?

The fact that we have in Gen. 1-11 two differing creation stories

Silly old canard. By chapter 2 it was finished there are no other accounts, just more details of what happened. Gen 2 is a haven for cranks and fanatics.

The Bible describes, in detail and in many places, the earth as being a disk covered by a dome.

You thought you knew what that meant??

The Bible describes a world-wide flood through which eight humans and hundreds of thousands of land animals were kept alive by a big boat while pretending that hundreds of thousands of kinds of marine life survived without so much as a lifejacket!

They didn't get off the boat till after the flood if I recall. Since when does walking require a lifejacket?

Sorry, but your wacky doubt spamming dressed as academia is busted.

 

[dad1]

I agree science has become a tool to minimize scripture and kill God.

Hehe we'll see who kills who!

 

[Craigbythesea]

Why Take Genesis Seriously?


The first eleven chapters of the Bible have been relegated by many to the category of myths, not real history. These are said tocontainspiritual truth, but they cannot be taken seriously as records of real people and events. Many sincere Christians who believe the Bible do not know what their pastors believe about the historicity of Genesis. Is it safe to assume that these believe in the following truths?

1. God created everything in six 24-hour days.
2. Adam and Eve were real people.
3. God cursed a perfect world as a judgment for sin.
4. Noah constructed an Ark by which two of every kind of air-breathing, land-dwelling animal were saved along with Noah's family from a global flood.
5. The confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel produced the language groups that are found around the world today.

An alarming number of Christian leaders and teachers instead believe that God "created" through evolutionary processes over millions of years, that Adam and Eve descended from a hominid population, and that there has never been a global flood, suggesting that the account of Noah and the Ark is a story adapted from a Babylonian myth.


Mainstream Christian orthodoxy regarded the opening chapters of Genesis as just as real and reliable as the rest of the Bible until 150-200 years ago. So what has happened?


This downgrading of the early chapters of Genesis has coincided with the rise of uniformitarian philosophy as the cornerstone of modern geology and of evolution as the core of modern biology. Christians have been ignorant of the process that has gradually changed their whole approach to the Bible. Consequently, Christian churches throughout the world reject the early chapters of Genesis as history, resulting in all manner of compromise intended to force geological ages and organic evolution into the Scriptures. Many Christians have shelved this apparent conflict as being divisive, too difficult to resolve, or irrelevant to the Christian faith.


Genesis as Reliable History


Yet the conflict still rages. What makes it more intense is that in the ranks of those Christians who have not compromised the historicity of Genesis are many scientists with doctoral degrees from the modern education system.


The Creation Science Movement in Great Britain and the Creation Research Society, which now boasts a membership of over 600 individuals with graduate degrees in science, have sought to remain faithful to accepting Genesis as reliable history. The Institute for Creation Research employed scientists with Ph.D.s to work full-time in creationist research, writing, and teaching. Other creationist groups were subsequently formed so that today there are creationist organizations in all corners of the globe.


So why would thousands of highly-trained scientists not only believe Genesis to be reliable history, but base their scientific research on the details and implications of that history? It stems foremost from their Christian convictions.


The Bible never claims to be a textbook on history or science, but if God is who He claims to be, then He has all knowledge and power, and never makes mistakes. Therefore, if the Bible is the Word of God, then it must be truthful, even when it touches upon matters of history and science. Otherwise, this Creator God is a liar. The very character of God requires the first eleven chapters of Genesis to be a trustworthy record.


The subsequent pages of Genesis recount the early history of the nation of Israel, beginning with Abraham. Few conservative Christian scholars would deny the historicity of these later chapters in Genesis. Yet many regard the creation account as a form of ancient Hebrew poetry, even though the genre throughout the first eleven chapters of Genesis is no different to that used in the remainder of the book. The conflict occurs not with the language but with the supposed scientific facts that insist on a multi-billion-year-old earth and organic evolution. A choice has to be made between Scripture, which is authored by God, and modern science, authored by men.


Liberal Christian scholars insist that Genesis was written perhaps as late as the post-Babylonian exile. But such claims overlook that in the pre-Flood world, people built cities, had tools of brass and iron, and made musical instruments. In Genesis 5, the record of Adam ends with the expression "this is the book of the generations of Adam." There is no reason to suppose that Adam and his descendants were not able to write and keep records, remembering that on the sixth day of creation Adam named all the animals, thus demonstrating his intellectual capacity.


Moses, the traditionally recognized author of Genesis, simply had to compile the book of Genesis from the records kept by Adam and his descendants. Thus Genesis reads as eyewitness accounts.


If the Creator God of the Bible is who He says He is, then not only is He capable of accurately telling us about the early universe, the earth, and man, but He is capable of having the details truthfully recorded and transmitted through successive generations.


Jesus Regarded Genesis as Real History


If Jesus was (and is) both the Creator God and a perfect man, then His pronouncements are always and absolutely trustworthy. And Jesus referred directly to details in each of the first seven chapters of Genesis fifteen times. For example, Jesus referred toGenesis 1:26-27when He said inMark 10:6, "But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female." Man was created male and female "from the beginning of the creation," not after millions of years. In the very next verse, Jesus quotes directly fromGenesis 2:24when He said, "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh." Five times Jesus refers to Noah and/or the destructive global Flood as real history. If He, as the Creator, was actually a witness to the events ofGenesis 1-11, then we have no alternative but to regard these opening chapters of the Bible as reliable history.


http://www.icr.org/article/genesis-real-reliable-historical/

The author of the article writes for creationist organizations that flaunt his Ph.D. in the science of geology, but do not bother to tell their readers that his specialty in geology is in the field of uranium exploration in Australia—and that he is, therefore, not at all qualified to have an opinion about the Genesis flood. Moreover, they do not bother to tell their readers that the author is unable to read the Bible in the languages in which it was written and is, therefore, not at all qualified to have an opinion about the genre of literature in which Gen. 1-11 was written. Indeed, he has less knowledge of the Bible than many teenagers! However, creationist organizations are so desperate that men like Andrew A. Snelling are the best that they can find to defend the nonsense that they teach.

I agree science has become a tool to minimize scripture and kill God.

That this is nothing but ridiculous garbage is shown by the fact that creationist organizations flaunt the Ph.D’s in fields of science that have been earned by 24 or 25 creationists. Or perhaps we are to believe that Andrew A. Snelling, the author of the article, is “a tool to minimize scripture and kill God “—something that he is doing a very effective job of!

 

[Crabtownboy]

Religion is religion; and science is science.

Science tells how God did something.

Religion tells why God did something.

Science that tries to tell why God did something is bad science.

Religion that tries to tell how God did something is bad religion.

Both have their role and they are important roles.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Great post.

That “great post” was copied and pasted from another website, and it failed to properly give credit to the author and publisher as required by the stipulations in the publisher’s statement of copyright.

 

[JonC]

....

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

Having rated my post "dumb", and considering that what I provided was Scripture, I think that perhaps you proved my point. Laugh God has indeed made foolish the wisdom of the world.