01 Mar 22
@josephw saidAnd what is your basis for this subjective interpretation and declaration? Your faith?
But the Genesis account of creation isn't metaphorical. There are no metaphors, figures of speech, allegorical language or symbolisms in the text. Creation happened literally the way it is described.
01 Mar 22
3 edits
@pb1022 saidOf course. Genesis is an example of an "antiquities", as the Romans called this type of literature, a popular genre telling of the appearance of humans and the ancestors and heroes, with elaborate genealogies and chronologies fleshed out with stories and anecdotes. There were many such 'books' in ancient times.
You do realize, don’t you, that the book of Genesis is about much more than the creation account?
Now, I'll tell you why the Jewish one cannot be true history. If everyone on the planet had been wiped out by a global flood, except Noah and his immediate family, then everyone on the planet today would be Semites and this would show up in their DNA. Such is not the case, however. There are people and peoples who are not Semites; this is genetic fact, not theory or speculation. Therefore, we are not all descended from Noah and his immediate family, Therefore, there was no global flood which extinguished all life save for those aboard a boat.
Moreover, if the human race had had to regenerate itself from Noah and his immediate family, we wouldn't be here. Incest leads to infertile off-spring after only five or six generations. (The human race cannot have descended from only two people either, Adam and Eve.)
- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
01 Mar 22
@moonbus saidWhat makes you think Noah was Jewish?
Of course. Genesis is an example of an "antiquities", as the Romans called this type of literature, a popular genre telling of the appearance of humans and the ancestors and heroes, with elaborate genealogies and chronologies fleshed out with stories and anecdotes. There were many such 'books' in ancient times.
Now, I'll tell you why the Jewish one cannot be true history. ...[text shortened]... r six generations. (The human race cannot have descended from only two people either, Adam and Eve.)
Jews are descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - not Noah.
And tell me how the theory of evolution just happened to create males and females with effective and functioning reproductive systems intact before they had sex and offspring.
- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
01 Mar 22
@moonbus saidMissed this point:
Of course. Genesis is an example of an "antiquities", as the Romans called this type of literature, a popular genre telling of the appearance of humans and the ancestors and heroes, with elaborate genealogies and chronologies fleshed out with stories and anecdotes. There were many such 'books' in ancient times.
Now, I'll tell you why the Jewish one cannot be true history. ...[text shortened]... r six generations. (The human race cannot have descended from only two people either, Adam and Eve.)
<<Moreover, if the human race had had to regenerate itself from Noah and his immediate family, we wouldn't be here. Incest leads to infertile off-spring after only five or six generations. (The human race cannot have descended from only two people either, Adam and Eve.)>>
You’re talking about the effects of that today (or in modern times.) You don’t know that that same effect existed in Biblical times.
01 Mar 22
@pb1022 saidThe laws of physics have not changed in the last 3,000 years.
Missed this point:
<<Moreover, if the human race had had to regenerate itself from Noah and his immediate family, we wouldn't be here. Incest leads to infertile off-spring after only five or six generations. (The human race cannot have descended from only two people either, Adam and Eve.)>>
You’re talking about the effects of that today (or in modern times.) You don’t know that that same effect existed in Biblical times.
01 Mar 22
@josephw saidSo there are 2 trees of life;
Literal.
…the one in Genesis which is placed at the east of Eden and guarded by a literal flaming sword and literal cherubim…
…and the one in Revelation which is described as straddling a presumably literal river bearing literally 12 types of fruit and growing leaves, leaves which are literally used to “heal nations”
Is this what you are claiming?
01 Mar 22
1 edit
@josephw saidSo the tree which bore the fruit of the knowledge of good an evil was a real tree with real magical fruit which when eaten opened Adam and Eve’s eyes so they could see that they were naked …
A tree is a tree is a tree. Any attempt at metaphoricalizing the word "tree" in the context of the Genesis account of creation, and the clear language of it, is a blatant failure of faith in God, and an act of trusting in ones own discordant intellect and subjective feelings.
Is this what you are claiming?
- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
01 Mar 22
@divegeester saidYou mean the knowledge of good and evil?
So the tree which bore the fruit of the knowledge of good an everlasting was a real tree with real magical fruit which when eaten opened Adam and Eve’s eyes so they could see that they were naked …
Is this what you are claiming?
01 Mar 22
@josephw saidIs this true for the book of Revelation?
Changing the meaning by "interpreting" the clear language of scripture to conform to ones preconceived ideas is no different from adding to or subtracting from the words.
Are the flying multiheaded beasts being ridden by whores wearing robes dipped in blood all literal, all real things?
01 Mar 22
1 edit
@josephw saidThis is an open thread in which anyone can reply to anyone.
Besides that my original post was to the author of the OP. Are you a spokesperson for divegeester? Or are you giving preliminary talking points for divegeester before he arrives?
Stop being so furtive Joseph.