ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Genesis Account Mythological

As Christians, how are we to answer those who say that science has proven the Genesis Creation account to be mythological, and not literal?

Moderator - I would state that science has proven just the opposite and then explain.

Join Our Christian Friendship and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 6/20/09
     Helpful Blog Vote (4)

Post a New Blog



1st Cliff: What do you have against us fundamentalists? We believe the same stuff as did Jesus, the apostles and all the disciples in the New Testament. Namely, that the Genesis account of creation is an accurate historical record and not a fable.

Yes, Satan uttered the first lie when he espoused immortality as the natural state of man in Gen 3:4. But what does that have to do with the topic under discussion here?
---jerry6593 on 6/26/09


Eric the topic is whether Genesis is mythological or not.

If you believe it contains mythological material please show where and why.
---Warwick on 6/25/09


Michael you are absolutely correct but those who refuse to accept Genesis as historical narrative ignore that the Bible writers, (OT & NT) and Jesus have always written about it as sober historical fact.

They also reject that the rules of grammar apply to the language therein.

Your use of 'day' with different meanings is grammatically correct and clear to anyone who understands English. However for nonBiblical reasons the sceptics will not, as they cannot, accept this. They accept these rules apply today but will not accept that the same rules apply to Genesis.

If they did, as they should, they would have to accept the unacceptable.
---Warwick on 6/25/09


To paraphrase Ecclesiastes 9:4 It is better to be a living buffalo than a dead sceptic. The living buffalo has hope.

The meaning of words does change, that is why we have new translations. Genesis 1:28 God said 'fill' the earth...' When the KJV was first translated (about 400 years ago) the Hebrew 'Male' (fill) was rendered as 'replenish' which then meant fill. Over time replenish came to mean 'refill', so modern versions are correct in using 'fill.' We know what the original Hebrew 'male' meant, we know what the 1600's 'replenish' meant therefore we have no problem with the changing meaning of words, do we!
---Warwick on 6/25/09


A question for Eric, and 1stCliff.

Is Jesus Christ God?

If not, why not?
---Warwick on 6/25/09




it's amazing how many people that don't believe in the truth of the Bible tell those that believe in the Truth the they are illogical.. quite ironic..hehe
---MIchael on 6/25/09


Mythological, the study of myths!
The Bible, the way, the truth and the life!
Sorry, I dont see the connection!
Im just to simple, sorry!
---TheSeg on 6/25/09


Timothy, I haven't a clue what progressive Christianity is. I am a Spinozist. All best to you!
---eric1968 on 6/25/09


Betty/Warwick ,Your problem is all in the word "DAY"
God created heaven and earth in 6 periods of time called "days"
To demonstrate to all onlookers Israel on a weekly basis worked 6 days and rested the 7th.
Using 6 24hr.days to represent the 6 periods of time (also called days)of creation This makes sense, logic an proper interpretation of scripture.
Look at "any one" thing of God's creation and tell me it was hastily conceived and created,and I'll tell you you don't know God!
---1st_cliee on 6/25/09


Jonathan, interestingly no one noticed the supposed two ceation accounts! Not Moses, Noah, Samuel, Isaiah et al!

Not 1 NT writer-God inspired-noticed! Jesus the creator didn't notice: in Mark 10:6 speaking of the Genesis foundation of marriage He joined vs 1:27, and 2:24 in 1 sentence-no hint of conflict.

Today Bible sceptics have discovered a conflict! Underwhelming.

Rather than trusting Bible sceptics read Scripture itself.

Genesis 1 is the 'big picture' the creation of the universe and everything in it. Ch. 2 centres upon Adam & Eve, their surroundings, giving information not found in ch.1. Not a creation account, doesn't mention the creation of the sun, stars, sea land, creatures....
---Warwick on 6/25/09




Eric1968: It makes perfect sense to someone not following the Progressive Christian movement. But please feel free to cut and paste your own Bible that best fits your needs. And please take care while playing on that slippery slope.
---TIMOTHY on 6/25/09


Genesis is not mythological just because some human beings wish to call it so. Some people need to pray for the Holy Spirit of God to teach them some things. Exodus 20:9-10, "Six days shall you labor and do all your work." Like God did work six days to create. "But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth...and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day...." Jesus could have said that the sabbath was not a sign that God created everything in six days, but He did not. Exodus 31:17 The sabbath was a sign between God & Israel that in six days God created the heaven and earth, and on the 7th He rested & was refreshed.
---Betty on 6/25/09


Timothy, you wrote, "If Genesis is mythological then the entire book is mythological, it must be thrown out entirely or validated entirely." That is silly. There are many genres in the Bible -- history, law-giving, exhortation, and, yes, mythology. Just because something is mythological doesn't mean that it isn't useful or that it has nothing to teach us. And just because part of the Bible is mythology, it doesn't follow that all the Bible is. You are setting up a false dichotomy -- all or nothing. That is illogical, and senseless.
---eric1968 on 6/25/09


I remember, back in the day, we used to go fishing down at the creek all day, every day for 3 days... Using word definitions in context is awesome, else communication would be very difficult if not impossible. Or, maybe I'm not communicating well enough for some.
---MIchael on 6/25/09


1stcliff- On the contrary, you are the one who cannot think outside the box, aren't you. God was able to create in six days, and He did. That's called faith and belief in God & His power. What is man that you are so mindful of him and his theories, and not mindful of the limitless power of God? Talking about planting tomatoes- I have been over the threshhold of death's door many times and God healed me immediately. He didn't take years, months, weeks or days. I have reason to know He can do anything.
---Betty on 6/25/09


Earl I am glad you only see one sun. Those who see two have probably had a little too much moonshine.

From Gods word we do know He created light on day one, as we cannot have evening and morning, 'one day' without it. On day four He created the sun. We humans can plan so I am sure you agree God can plan far far better. I am therefore sure God foreknew that He would create the sun on day four, and for a very good reason.

After He created the sun His light was no longer needed, nor obviously is it needed now. However as I am sure you know it is booked to return in heaven-Rev. 21:23.

---Warwick on 6/25/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


Warwick,

The two accounts of creation in the first two chapters contradict one another. It's not opinion. It's fact. They contradict one another.
---Jonathan on 6/25/09


Warwick,About Moses ,the commandments and the order to rest on the seventh day because it was also God's day of rest ,well have you read Deuteronomy 5.14-15.
Here we have another reason for keeping the sabbath .Now there are two reasons for keeping the sabbath.Which one did God say is the reason for keeping the sabbath?
Therefore from this, credibility suffers in the 'creation days' you mention because two reasons are given.
---earl on 6/24/09


If Genesis is mythological then the entire book is mythological, it must be thrown out entirely or validated entirely. You can not pick and choose the parts of the Bible that appeal to you, it is either all or nothing. It is either all the inspired word of God or it is all bunk. I choose that it is all the inspired word of God whether I understand it all or not. I leave you to your eternal choice, please choose as if your eternity depended upon your answer.
---TIMOTHY on 6/24/09


Agreed, science has proven just the opposite in creation having a design and therefore a designer.

It was science that said you can't have an action without cause which takes us to the throne of God who spoke whatever big bang started it all.
---larry on 6/24/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


Betty, I see that you have the same problem as all the other fundamentalists.(Not thinking outside the box)
Example- Catholic formula for the "Assumption" God wanted it, He could do it, therefore it was done!
Saying that God can do anything doesn't mean he did it just "because he can!"
You throw logic out the window!
Gen.2.8 "God had planted a garden east in Eden"
When you planted your tomatoes last night,did you pick them for supper tonight?
How long does it take food to grow? fruit to ripen? Logic!
God was in a time bind???
---1st_cliff on 6/24/09


Betty,Warwick EtAl, No offence here,it's been my experience trying to reason with fundamentalists (Isa.1.18.) has the same effect as playing the violin to a water buffalo! A blank stare, no comprehension!
To them God is a few words on paper,no logic, no reason, no compassion,no justice,all literal words who's meaning has not changed in thousands of years!
Do you remember when gay meant =happy?,a fag was a cigarette? Hooker meant tatting lace?? etc.
---1st_cliff on 6/24/09


Warwick,As I look into the daylit sky I see only one light not two.Is it the light from day one or day four?
God can surely light an unknown heavenly world with energies unknown to us but on this world the only light I see above me is the one in this earth sky.
---earl on 6/24/09


Cluny as a Christian you should know your Bible and should know of these quotes. Jesus and the apostles regularly quoted from or alluded to the first few chapters of Genesis.

In Mark 10: 6 Jesus said man was made at the beginning of the creation, which fits with a 7-day creation week but is obviously nonesnse if the world existed for eons before mans creation.

See also John 1:1, Heb. 1:10, 4:3,4, & 11:3, 2 Co.4:6, 2 Pe. 3:4,5, 1 Co. 11:17, 15: 38,39,45, Mark 10, 6-8, Col. 3:10, 1 Tim 2:13, 4:4, Acts 17:24, Rom. 5:12, Eph. 5:30

Just a small selection showing Jesus and His apostles always wrote of Genesis as sober history, supporting the straight-forward reading.
---Warwick on 6/24/09


Send a Free Smiles & Hugs Ecard


I think the best Carbon 14 quote I have read is: 'If a C14 date supports our theories we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a foot note. And if it is completely "out of date", we just ignore it.' Quoted by T. Save-Soderberg & I.U. Olsen Institure of Egyptology and Institute of Pyhsics, respectively, University of Upsala Sweden.

That is, dates which fit in with the belief system, are used, but 'wrong' dates are ignored!

The long-ages crowd say diamonds are billions of years old. However C14 has been found in diamonds. The problem being the maximum life of C14 is less than 100,000 years so the diamonds cannot be any older-could be a few thousand years old!
---Warwick on 6/24/09


1stcliff in reality I am a poor jumper. A reasonable runner though.

You wrote 'I've heard all your unfounded arguments many times,...' I have asked you to show even one such 'unfounded argument', and have received only silence, eloquent silence! Stick to the truth. What I actually said was-the Bible is your only source but you pick and choose what you are prepared to believe. You show I am correct in writing 'I have never said I "reject" the Gen. account,except the foolish idea that our solar system was created in one week (your interpretation)'

I have demonstrated the truth of this via Scripture. If I am wrong please show me this, using Scripture. Otherwise admit your error. Silence equals consent.
---Warwick on 6/24/09


Please listen, if not to us. Then listen to God word. I beg you!

2Th 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Dont believe a lie, please. Look for truth.
Dont you think you can be fool?
You, might think why should I care?
One day, Ill tell you!
---TheSeg on 6/24/09


1stCliff you wrote 'I absolutely accept the genuine Jesus picked Apostles words and OT saints!'

Do they give any support to your ideas regarding the length of creation days? You know they don't.

Jesus Himself says you are wrong (Mark 10:6) He says man was made 'at the beginning of creation.' He is obviously not talking of man being made at the beginning of creation week but at the beginning of the creation, in which we live.

This of course makes sense if the days of creation and all days since were 24hrs. However if the first 3 days were of great length (contrary to Genesis 1:5 & Exodus 20:8-11) Jesus, is wrong, or worse lied!

You have lost me with Gen3.4!!!!
---Warwick on 6/24/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


cluny. the apostles accepted Genesis just as it is written,just as jesus did.to reject it means Gods word is in error,which to the minds of men make it all open to tidicule as myth.GOD WORD IS ALL TRUE OR ALL FALSE CHOOSE.
---tom2 on 6/24/09


1stcliff- Like Jesus said according to Matthew 22:29, "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God."

God was able to create all things in 6 days, and He did so. He did not have to take any longer, why would He?
---Betty on 6/24/09


earl- Do you let a theory of man stand between you and the truth of the Bible? Do you mean carbon dating? How could they ever tell the truth about that theory? Carbon-dating is a method of dating something. Can they prove it? NO. The Bible says FIRST God created light(not the sun). God divided the light from the darkness. He called the light Day, and the Darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. There was daylight for the plants if they needed it from Day 1. The sun was created the day after the plants-no long wait for sunlight.
---Betty on 6/24/09


I believe Genesis to be historically accurate. I also believe that carbon and radio-isotope dating to be mythological and requiring alot more faith to follow that 'religion', a science so falsely called.
Praise to all who defend the Word of God.
---MIchael on 6/24/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


Earl one common thing I note with doubters is their lack of familiarity with Scripture. Nowhere does God say, nor did I say, that He created the sun on day one. Anyone familiar with Genesis knows He created light 'Or' in Hebrew, on day one.

I think it was Augustine who proposed the idea that God left the Sun's creation to day 4 to show it was just a thing, not something to be worshipped. He may be right!

It just comes down to whether you believe God has the ability to light the earth or heaven (Rev. 21:23) for that matter, without a created object like the sun. Genesis 1:5 says He can. Nothing says He can't!
---Warwick on 6/24/09


\\Do you also accept what the apostles said about Genesis?\\

And just what DID the apostles say about the opening chapters of Genesis?

Please be specific.
---Cluny on 6/24/09


Warwick, I'm amazed that you don't break a leg jumping to conclusions.
I have never said I "reject" the Gen. account,except the foolish idea that our solar system was created in one week (your interpretation)
I absolutely accept the genuine Jesus picked Apostles words and OT saints!
Gen3.4 You side with the serpent's words "You will not surely die" (ever)a basic fundamentalist doctrine! Unfounded!
Death IS the ultimate penalty for sin!

---1st_cliff on 6/23/09


Jerry ,just curious ,what technique do you use to calculate time?Why?
---earl on 6/23/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Earl Genesis 1:3-5 says God created light. Then comes evening and morning which He calls 'one day', in Hebrew.

In verse 19 God says 'And there was evening and there was morning-'a fourth day.' As He uses exactly the same language to describe the first and the fourth day, they are days of the same length.

To further confirm the length of these days see Exodus 20:8-11- He tells His people to work 6 days and rest the 7th because He created in 6 days and rested the 7th-absolutely no hint that His creation days are of different length to the days of our 7 day week, just the opposite. If you say we cannot accept the straight-forward meaning of this, both language, and this commandment, are meaningless.

Let Scripture be our guide.
---Warwick on 6/23/09


Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there, and they need no candle, neither light of the sun, for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.

I only wish, somehow, you could accept, my word for it.
Along time ago now, I saw, what you would call spirit, ghost, people, things that go bump in the night. Call them what ever you want. I dont care! But, its not what I saw, though it is important. Its not as important, as what I felt that night. A love, no one can put into words. I felt life, I dont feel now. But, I feel as, if it was burned into me.

Yes, why tell you? Dont know!
---TheSeg on 6/23/09


Warwick,the biblical interpreters in this common kjv state in foot notes that day four the moon and the sun were made.Are they decievers or just plain ignorant?No additional description refering to a sun is found here in foot notes for day one.
This solar system is not a dual sun solar system.
Since you was silent on plant life without sun and rekeyed it to day one versus day four Ill say that carbon is the tell tale sign that the sun existed before the plant life.
---earl on 6/23/09


1stCliff be specific, show me one of my arguments which is unfounded!

Yes you are hypocritical. You would know nothing of Genesis if it wasn't for the Bible but you pick and choose what you are prepared to accept. While quoting various Scriptures to support your case you reject others-hypocrisy.

You say you believe God created Adam and Eve because Jesus said so. He also said man was made at the beginning of this creation in which we live. Do you also accept this as Truth?

Do you also accept what the apostles said about Genesis?

I oppose Genesis 3:4?

Jesus, the apostles and countless others accept Genesis as truth, the real history of our origins, as do I and countless others. You don't.
---Warwick on 6/23/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Warwick ,recheck.Not only does carbon dioxide enter a plant and the waste is oxygen but plants also consume carbon dioxide during the daytime period as well and respire some of this carbon dioxide back to the atmosphere during the night.
This information may be listed as terrestrial plants and carbon interactions.
Now ,I see that you are referencing from -day one which there is light on the first day ,or, the other where there is light on the fourth day?So you are stating the light-sun was created twice,am I correct?
---earl on 6/23/09


Betty, My gaskets are all intact thank you!
Fundamentalists are all marching down the "broad road" they mistakenly think credulity is faith!
It's like the pied piper leading the parade, following blindly the one they think is Christ.
They think satan's asleep at the switch,the master of disguise.
How long did it take for him to get to Adam and Eve??
Getting to the Christian congregation after Jesus left was "a piece of cake"!
Christ warned "narrow and cramped" is the road!
---1st_cliff on 6/23/09


Fossils came after the Great Flood of Noah's time. God created Day and Night on the first day. He made grass, herb yielding seed, & the tree yielding fruit on the third day. He made the sun, etc. on the fourth day. If the plants needed light, they had it from Day 1. If they needed the sun's light, they got it the day after they were created. Not so long to wait.
---Betty on 6/23/09


1stcliff- I don't understand what you blew a gasket about. Why do you think Warwick is marching down the interstate with his friends? Do you believe the Genesis account is literal?
---Betty on 6/23/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


Earl I am having trouble understanding your point so I called in my inhouse scientist who agrees you are geting photosynthesis and respiration mixed up. During photosynthesis plants take in CO2 and release O2. Maybe this is what you meant?

Are you trying to say the light God created on day 1 was not sufficient to power photosynthesis? If so why not?

Earl the evidence is that fossils can form quickly. In fact if they are not quickly covered in a cement like material (excluding oxygen) they will decay too quickly for fosilization, or more correctly permineralization, to occur. This obviously fits in with rapid Noah's Flood burial rather than long-ages uniformitarianism. How can anything fosilize if it not rapidly buried?
---Warwick on 6/23/09


earl: "Plants release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere." Uhhh, that would be ... oxygen.

I see that you are hung up on the fact that the vegetation created on day 3 needed the sun that was created on day 4. First of all, plants can survive total darkness for 24 hours - but not for eons. Secondly, plants can grow just fine with other than sunlight as a source (just ask any pothead). Throughout scripture, God's physical presence is described as emitting intense light. e.g.:

Rev 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
---jerry6593 on 6/23/09


Warwick, Unlike the fundamentalists ,I don't throw stones and run away.I've been many years on here.
I've heard all your unfounded arguments many times,same old, same old!
Sorry to disappoint you but I have no "misinformation"
Hypocritical? that I cited that scripture? (Gen.3.4)
You know it's there and oppose it..who's the blind guide?
I have no animosity, Christianity is an uphill battle with a narrow gate and cramped road!
You are marching down the interstate with all your friends!
---1st_cliff on 6/22/09


Ktisophilos, There are no doubts in my mind that God created Adam and Eve,
Christ spoke about them.
I simply pointed out that Moses didn't write it as there were 2 separate accounts of the same event by (obviously by 2 writers)as there are dual accounts of other events also!
---1st_cliff on 6/22/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


Ask them how rocks that were supposedly millions and millions of years old were undiscovered for the thousands of years of human historical records and then about 150 years ago suddenly all popped up on the surface conveniently. Also why is there no record of dinosaurs.
---frances008 on 6/22/09


Warwick,Plants release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.A carbon footprint in fossil plant life is left ,a result of photosyntheis which requires sunlight.Excluding any form of calculating plant fossil age the fact is that sunlight is present during plant growth.
This concludes that day three and day four are out of sequence.Did plant life jump time -grow -without releasing carbon-prior to day four ?Or did plant life grow releasing carbon without leaving a footprint-thus a plant life unknown to our known and fossilized ones classified by modern man?
Plant fossils become so by linear time so how long does it take for plant life to fossilize?
---earl on 6/22/09


Jonathan let us concern ourselves about what God says, not human opinion.

Jesus, the Creator should know. In Mark 10:6 He quoted from Genesis 1:27, and 2:24 without any hint they were two contradictory accounts of creation! Nowhere in Scripture does anyone allude to there being 2 accounts, so why do some go on about it? Not for Biblical reasons obviously.

Jesus also said man was made at the beginning of the creation (that in which we live) which fits with 6 24hr day creation but contradicts nonBiblical long-ages views.

Remember the NT makes it very clear the historical events of the early chapters of Genesis are the historical foundation of the only gospel.

How can absolute accuracy and truth not matter?
---Warwick on 6/22/09


Jerry, Semiramis was both his mother and wife in an incestuous relationship! That's what makes it so bizzare!
Sure scrolls of Moses and the prophets were housed in the synagogue, but I said they had no bibles! They were mostly illiterate anyway!
---1st_cliff on 6/22/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


1stCliff you wrote ' I have no desire to undermine your faith.' My faith is in God and His word. There is nothing a mere man can do to shake that!

I am in no way challenged by that which you have written. I only feel sad that you will miss out on His blessings.

Cliff many like you come, spewing your ridicule, misinformation and hate, but then you go! I oppose you, not to defend my faith, but to show others that you are a wolf in the fold.

You wrote 'Just as the serpent told Eve "you will not surely die"' How hypocritical of you. You quote from the source you ridicule. How do you know Eve said that? In fact how do you know Eve even existed?
---Warwick on 6/22/09


Don't worry about it. This argument has been going on for ages and ages. Anyone who believes that is mistaken in that belief. It's a silly assertion anyway. There are five million different versions of what Genesis says, bandied about amongst theologians. Which version has been supposedly disproven by science?

There isn't anything to even question other than the fact that the two chronologies don't match exactly. Well... noone writes a story that is full of contradictions on purpose unless they deliberately want the scenario to be disbelieved. There is more to the Genesis story than the literal. More than we know.
---Jonathan on 6/22/09


Proverbs 12:15

---Leon on 6/22/09


eric- (6-20-09) The Genesis account is not a myth. Warwick told it like it is on 6-20-09. Jesus quoted Genesis, and did not refute it. If some scientists & their admirers want to talk about some myths, they ought to talk about the moon walks, etc. Now there is a myth. NASA dishes out a lot of science-fiction.
---Betty on 6/22/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


Earl 'All Scripture' is the written word of God, being 'God breathed' 2 tim. 3:16. It was written at God's inspiration as he moved men too do so.

It also contains the words of the Word, coming direct from the mouth of 'Our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ'-Titus 2:13. Being our God, Saviour and Creator He knows the difference between absolute truth and mans insipid counterfeit.

Many detractors have claimed there was much error in Scripture but most 'errors' have been explained.

Evidence can be examined by anyone. A broken window and a rock is evidence of foul play. Who needs to be a scientist to investigate this? BTW evidence does not exist because I claim it does.

Regarding time, what is your point?
---Warwick on 6/22/09


1st Cliff: I'm shocked that you don't understand that Jesus and the New Testament writers did indeed have the writings of Moses and the Prophets - the Old Testament (in scroll form as bookbinding had not yet been invented) - which they well understood and quoted from frequently.

I can't find where Warwick claims that hades (Gr: grave) is a subterrainian place of eternal torture.

For future reference: Semiramis (note spelling) was the wife of Nimrod - not his mother, and according to Dante, Cerberus had three heads.
---jerry6593 on 6/22/09


dear earl and the rest. the problem with the entire discussion is that one needs to first look at what kind of believer gives the proof. take the grand canion as an example an evolutionist will look at it and say, WOW look what the colorado did over millions of years. an creationist will look at the same grand canyon and say WOW look what the flood caused. both accuse eachother tobe stupid. and yes both are stupid because both refuse to see a full picture to make their own point. Personally i know God created this world in six days. since i was pressent (actually i was som dust laying around at that time, lol).
---andy3996 on 6/22/09


2... as long as someone does not try to destroy or iliminate the word of God, i do not care how exactely one believes. as long as he does not touch tyhe foundations of our faith.(see ex. the Nicene creed)scientists need to undertsand that faithworks is not something we can proof cause miracles defie natural laws, God can at all times intervene.(example exodus which totally defies the basic laws of gravity by the splitting of ythe sea) and bible teachers also need to understand that the bible is not a science book. otherwise neither the flood or the walking of Jesus on the lake would never have occured.
---andy3996 on 6/22/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


There is an excelletn magazine called 'Answers in Genesis'. Also check out John McKay. Christian scientists who look at creation from a scientific viewpoint. Makes a lot more sense than evolution I can tell you.
---Eric on 6/22/09


I believe the story of Genesis, is not only true. But, word per word true!
As simple, as Adam and Eve, with the two trees is.
Thank God, you dont have too. John 12:47
As far as the Bible talking, doesnt it speak of some people?
John 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
If you cant hear it, then, ask God why not? Yes, I believe all the base are cover!

Linear time, is this not only a way, for us to know when now is?
Because real time and space is warp, is it not? Maybe this is wrong too!
But, Im sure you will say, I am only a simple man. Right!
God Bless You
---TheSeg on 6/22/09


Cliff the Spong devotee:

Not that you care about what Christ said, but in Matthew 19:3-6, He cited Gen. 1:27 and 2:24 as real history, and about the same man and woman. He also didn't hallucinate any contradiction. Note that in v.5, Gen. 2:4 is attributed to the One who made Adam and Eve, i.e. the Scripture was the word of God.
---Ktisophilos on 6/21/09


Earl is just elephant hurling. He hasn't the slightest evidence of historical errors. Indeed, Moses was the editor of Genesis from pre-existing ancient accounts, but this editing was under the direction of the Holy Spirit. That's why Jesus said:

"He (Abraham) said to him (the rich man in Hell), 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" (Luke 19:31)

"If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say." (John 5:46-47).
---Ktisophilos on 6/21/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


Well said Michael.

I cannot comprehend the 'logic' of people who write about the Bible, apparently accepting part A and rejecting part B. The Bible is obviously their source for the Bible but they reject parts of their own source, with no 'on the spot' knowledge.

They, along with every other human, cannot claim to have been there at the beginning. Very confusing.

I suppose it could be likened to attending a documentary upon a subject otherwise unknown to them, then telling us the movie is wrong! Bizarre!

The whole concept is too abstract for me. The Bible is either God's word for us or not. For me it is.

If you don't love and trust God's word then for your own health move on.
---Warwick on 6/21/09


Warwick, I have no desire to undermine your faith.You are locked into this "ism" like the other puppets.
"it is used to mean something different than the pagan Greek idea"? NO,
Christendom has borrowed this from Greek mythology!
Same idea, a holding place for the dead,which give credence to the false idea that the dead don't rally die.Just as the serpent told Eve "you will not surely die"
It's you who are on the wrong side of the fence!
---1st_cliff on 6/21/09


Warwick,The bible cannot speak a word so it cannot claim to be the word of God.Many say the bible 'says' but it really has no voice.
The bible is not without historical fault.There are numerous edits from unskilled editors.
The 'avaliable evidence' you claim can only be classed as such if it at first is examined scientifically.Evidence is made as such by it's examinations by us.
All examinations of history must be framed with linear time .This is the only way to view sucession of physical events by humans.
We cannot'jump time' nor can time dissappear from physical events we know as linear.
---earl on 6/21/09


Are you saved 1st_cliff?
How do you know?
What difference has it made in your life?
Assuming the Bible is not the 'truth', any reference to it cannot be used to establish you being saved.
Is there another way to know God's will and His workings in our lives?
Don't you want to see Yeshua someday?
How do you know about Yeshua?
Isn't it written in a book that you claim not to be the 'truth'?
Where does your mythology stop and your reality begin?
---MIchael on 6/21/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


1stCliff your desire to undermine faith is an unhealthy obsession for you.

I am well aware that 'hades' is used in the Bible however it is used to mean something very different than the pagan Greek idea. The pagan meaning is not applied in God's word is it?

As I see it you have a deep problem with submitting to God. Therefore you are driven to undermining tactics. This is more about you than God's word.

Sadly you will never understand, nor accept the truth of Scripture, by studying pagan literature. In reality, as Scripture says, there are mysteries which only believers can understand and that only by revelation. See Ephesians chapter 3.

Those in strident opposition (as I once was) obviously have no chance.
---Warwick on 6/21/09


If linear time is excluded as a tool to calculate sequence of events in a time line procession then 'history' does not exist and neither does the 'present' nor is there a 'future'. Consider a record of events not in a sucession of time.Do you know what time it is?
---earl on 6/21/09


Warwick, Just where does "the bible*" CLAIM to be the word of God?? (*27 books,*39 books or *66 books)
What words did Jesus say about "the bible*"??
When He sent them out, Mat 28. into all the world to make disciples, did He say "Don't forget your bible?" Did they have one???
Fact= When Jesus was on earth ,there was no bible,per se' right?
Did God wait more than 4,000 years to "create" the bible??
Was it possable to be saved without it?
3,000 were added in one day,after Pentacost, no one had a bible! Comprende'?
What they did have was "truth"!
---1st_cliff on 6/21/09


The answer is that the scientific method is incapable of proving or disproving past events. Operational science is about testability, observation and repeatability. We cannot scientifically test the past, it's gone!

Long-ages/evolution belief is simply that, untestble belief, which keeps changing as new evidence (as opposed to proof) contradicts old. 'Facts' of a few decades ago are now discarded.

The Bible claims to be the word of God who created it. As Christians we have a reliable historical source. We also have the Holy spirit to guide us. We are not alone.

Ultimately what anyone believes about our origins is by faith, however the available evidence better supports Biblical creation than evolutionary speculations.
---Warwick on 6/21/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture


your question implies that the account in the bible is a senario which was fabricated within the minds of men and written down.Science does not apply to GOD.God is spirit outside of physical reality,and time.Nothing of this physical reality we live in applies to him. He created everything,and the account is it took 6 days and on the 7th day he rested.As a gentile my proof of God is in his son jesus,believing him gives me faith to believe the word as literal.jesus spoke about many prophecies about him in the OT,and that all within it was truth,to question any of it is to question GOD.
---tom2 on 6/21/09


Warwick,
Realise that the topic thread is 'creation account' historical and scientific interest).
The creation story is not settled as truth because there are issues that remain clouded however the Creationist of this creation is completely settled in my self therefore spontaneous evolution is a poor choice to describe universe progression.
If a person insists that the world was created in a few days then the person must give support to a definition of time, calculating linear time from a source that is common .And, Tell us how plants and trees grow without sunlight ,if not then tell us how God does it .The creation sequence ,in view of current working knowledge,is out of order.
---earl on 6/21/09


Warwick, I'm glad that you separate truth from mythology (your 2nd paragraph)
Now I wonder why as a fundamentalist you would embrace the idea that Hades as a place of the living dead, when it's so blatantly Greek mythology?
Hades was a god of the underworld in (also called)Hades with 4 compartments, depending on the severity of the sin!
Cerberus, the many headed dog, guarded the entrance to prevent escape!
---1st_cliff on 6/21/09


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.