by losthobbit 31 Replies latest watchtower bible
I always tell people you cant get out of the book of genesis with-out finding drastic errors and plot oversights. My top 3:
Gen 3 it was god who actually lied
Cain was the one who initiated the sacrifice of his first fruits but god dissed him
Tower of babel man was on his way to being unified to an extent that god said there is now nothing that they cannot accomplish...so he confused their language.
Interesting thoughts to consider, Juan.
Losthobbit, I think you do yourself and others a disservice when you say that it must be taken literally. It is certainly your choice to do so, but it just isn't true. It is obvious that not everything is meant to be taken literally in the bible. Example - Christ is the light of the world. Is that supposed to be literal? Was he a walking glowstick? That is one of many such examples, but I used it in the hopes of pointing something out in your analysis that you might not have considered:
So God created the heavens, before he created light? Okay, I suppose this could be possible, depending how you interpret it, like "heavens" could refer to the atmosphere, but it sounds to me like he made all the stars, but they weren't glowing. Lets skip ahead to verse 14...
Gen 1:14 "And God said, "Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night... etc."
Gen 1:16 "God made two great lights-the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars... etc."
Confusing ... I thought he already made the light, back in verse 3. Anyway, it sounds a bit like God is using a 3D modelling program, like 3DS max, where you can create things in any sort of order, and enable them, and then disable them.
It does depend on how you interpret heavens. Is it atmosphere? Outer space? Or heaven as in the spiritual realm?
If Christ is the light and life of the world, then I think the light that was created is Him. Then the lights in the vault of the sky are stars; and the two great lights are the moon and the sun. Literal, physical lights as opposed to the spiritual light and life of Christ.
Now as for the second story regarding Adam and Eve, I agree that everything in that story is representing something else. The tree of life symbolizes life. The tree of knowledge of good and evil symbolizes knowledge of good and evil. But people understand a lesson better when they can visualize it, so the things that were being symbolized were given something concrete for people to visualize.
Tammy
Losthobbit - Wow, talk about food for thought ....this is a banquet!
I have never looked at these 'scriptures' this way before or until recently never doubted the authenticity of the bible as a whole!
So before I run away to get a bigger spoon to dig thru all this again, thank you Hobbit very much ... also great comments on this!
clarity
I am no scholar and my Bible knowledge came only from the WTS, but it seems to me that literalists make a rod for their own back.
JW's accept that a creation "day" is not literal, so why stop there?
If we take Genesis as teaching us one basic truth, that God is responsible for creation and our existence, but the details are a kind of parable that was not intended to be a scientific document that would stand up in the twenty first century......then I have no problem with it.
Others can debate about the old Earth v young Earth, or dates of fossils, that is fine and interesting but not faith shattering.
It's hard to read it today without reflecting on modern knowledge about the earth and the universe, but of course the writers of this passage had no such knowledge of these things. This is how I think they meant it to be read:
In the beginning, God created heaven and earth.
The ancient people of the time would have seen their universe as heaven (everything above them- stars, clouds, etc.) and everything below them (soil, caves, sea, etc.). For all they knew the earth stretched out forever, and could have been solid earth and water downward forever. Our modern concept of a spherical earth being a mere speck amidst a solar system, within a galaxy, within a universe would have been totally unknown. So, heaven/earth. Why else would they think it any other way?
Just one example of trying to see the scripture the way it was meant to be seen. I shan't go on. I think the point is made. The people had no knowledge of quarks and photons, so when it comes to God creating light their only point of reference is trying to start a fire or light an oil lamp, and so on.
I like the 3D Max comparison. You would create a scene much like as described in Gen 1. You wouldn't create an entire universe of stars and galaxies then just focus on one planet. Of course such a concept would probably be unthinkable to people of the time. You would also light the scene with a default light before pinpointing it to luminaries. Do you think it was written by a time travelling animator from Pixar?
but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground."
Artesian springs, I imagine.
Not that anyone ever asks, but what do the Jews think about the first book of their Torah? Is it to be taken literally or is it mostly just metaphor and allegory? After all it is their book and while other religions may give their own interpretations of Genesis, We might ask--is that fair?
Thank you Moshe. I've read many a Rabbi who say, without pulling any punches, that anybody who takes the Old Testament stories literally is a fool and should start over again in kindergarten.
If Genesis isn't meant to be taken literally, but as an allegory, what great lessons does it offer? On that level it is an equally utter failure as it is when taken literally.
It is simply badly written fiction. The bible would go nowhere near the New York Times bestseller list if it was released fresh to the world tomorrow.
And who would publish it?
LostHobbit, I enjoyed your report on Genesis and, to be honest, I usually don't read posts that long. It contained a few critical questions I've often wondered but also raised new ones and makes for a great lighthearted review of the Genesis creation account. Like you, I missed the glaringly obvious points when I read it as a believer. Only after shelving my religious presupposition did I finally take notice and say, WTF?!
Thanks for bringing another beam of logic to the forum.
Gen 1:3 "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light."
God created Light at this point in order to illuminate His subsequent creative actions?
Like a person turning on the lamp above a workbench before they start making something.
