Adam And Eve - Just An Allegory?

[Guest]

Finished Work

 

For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. Psalms 119:89

 

~

 

 

There are two ways. One is, and will take forever, going through each book, each subsection and grouping of verses, and studying those out independently. That's what I did for a sufficient amount to establish the likelihood of the resurrection. The second is reading without worrying about it much and the Spirit seems to use certain passages to communicate things to me. I figure between those two extremes is again the answer I should settle on in general. It's a work in progress. 

 

So when Paul says that ALL Scripture is inspired by God, why do you reject that claim of Scripture?   Was that part of the Bible that wasn't inspired?  

 

It is inspired. The question is what does the inspiration entail. As I told you earlier, God may have inspired content into authors and then allowed them a measure of leeway as to how to present concepts. 

 

God did not circumvent their personalities, but the information must be transmitted without error, or there is no point in reading the Bible.  If you cannot trust that what you are reading is true, then the Bible is pretty much useless.

 

 

 

Indeed The Evolutionist's Bible

 

And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed: And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned. Isaiah 29:11-12

 

Would Seem Pretty Much Useless

Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: Isaiah 29:13

 

Unless That Is, He Should Read And Believe

 

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160

 

And Finally Turn His Understanding Over To The Book Of Truth

 

Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee. Psalms 119:11

 

And To It's Creator God

 

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:1-5

 

Believe And Be Blessed Beloved

 

Love, Joe

[~candice~]

candice hits the nail on the head. It's bizarre to state that evolution somehow entails a less powerful God. That doesn't follow whatsoever and has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not God did in fact use evolution to create us.

 

Well, taking time doesn't infer a less powerful God. After all, according to eschatology, Jesus is coming back "soon". Is Jesus less powerful because He hasn't come back already?

 

It is the length of time I am concerned about. 

[Guest]

 

.... It's bizarre to state that evolution somehow entails a less powerful God. That doesn't follow whatsoever and has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not God did in fact use evolution to create us.

 

Well, taking time doesn't infer a less powerful God. After all, according to eschatology, Jesus is coming back "soon". Is Jesus less powerful because He hasn't come back already?

 

It is the length of time I am concerned about.

 

~

 

Pretty Much

 

 

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. Genesis 2:1-3 (KJV)

 

From Sabbath To Sabbath As I Read It

 

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Exodus 20:8-11 (KJV)

 

And Unless The Always Twisting Evolution Myth Now Claims Six Day Creation By God's Word

 

Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind: "Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall declare to me. Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements-- surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone when the morning stars sang together praise." Job 38:1-7 (New Revised Standard Version)

 

It Is Indeed Bizarre To Claim Any Relation Between That Mocking Of Pagan Man

 

O LORD, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all; the earth is full of your creatures. Yonder is the sea, great and wide, creeping things innumerable are there, living things both small and great. There go the ships, and Leviathan that you formed to sport in it. These all look to you to give them their food in due season; when you give to them, they gather it up; when you open your hand, they are filled with good things. When you hide your face, they are dismayed; when you take away their breath, they die and return to their dust. When you send forth your spirit, they are created; and you renew the face of the ground. Psalms 104:24-30 (New Revised Standard Version)

 

And The Almighty God, The LORD Jesus The Christ

 

Jesus is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers-- all things have been created through him and for him. Colossians 1:15-16 (New Revised Standard Version)

[Mr. Nice Christian]

Shiloh do you think, that if the bible is not entireley literal, and that there are parts in the bible that did not historically happen, then that means the bible is useless?

Edited June 23, 2013 by Mr. Nice Christian

[enoob57]

Candice how do you reconcile God's defined period of creation here by comparison?

Ex 20:8-11

8 "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,

10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor

your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor

your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth,

the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath

day and hallowed it.
NKJV

[~candice~]

Candice how do you reconcile God's defined period of creation here by comparison?

Ex 20:8-11

8 "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,

10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor

your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor

your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth,

the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath

day and hallowed it.

NKJV

 

I'm not questioning it at all.

 

I'm questioning the assumption that God has lessor power if He took longer to create.

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh, you confuse me LOL.

 

Did you say this?

 

• "Evolution is inconsistent with God's omnipotence. Since He has all power, He is capable of creating the universe in an instant, rather than having to stretch out His creating over eons of time.

Or have I cited incorrectly?

 

God didn't create everything in an instant. There was a beginning, but man wasn't created until the end of the first week (according to a non-allegorical literal reading of Genesis). That is hardly in an instant?

 

God also could have created in three days, rather than six. Is God demonstrating weakness by taking six days? I'd just be very careful about this argument that infers the length of time taken to create somehow infers His power.

You are reading something into that statement that wasn't intended.  I am not saying that God has less power if he took longer to create.  Not sure how you arrive at that from what I posted.  That was not even close to the point.  The point is that an all powerful God doesn't need to rely on an impersonal method

 

I didn't say that God created everything in an instant.  I said He is capable of doing that.  

The same point applies to (2). What defines "a long period of time" such that God was acting outside of His character to wait x units of time to create fellowship, but not at x-1? I don't even think such a boundary exists. After all, some might say that 5 days was too long.

 

I just think you are delving into a space you have no authority to discuss, unless God has told you all of the options available? I mean, you even diss OEC when you make those kind of statements.

 

 

 

Man was the goal of creation.   God made the earth for mankind.  #2 is simply pointing out that God, using evolution over  billoins and billions of years to accomplish that goal doens't really make sense, especially given what Evolutoin entails.

 

The Bible says that God created man apart from the rest of the created order.  Man is not a cog in the evolutionary machine.  Man is made entirely separate from the animal kingdom in all spheres of that kingdom.   Man was created directly by God from the dirt.  That fact alone dispels the millions and millions of years needed for man to come into existence according to the ToE.

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh do you think, that if the bible is not entireley literal, and that there are parts in the bible that did not historically happen, then that means the bible is useless?

Yes, because if the Bible relates a story as a historical narrative and the story didn't really happen,  the Bible can't be trusted.  Genesis 1-11 is not written as an allegory.  It has no literary elements that indicate it is an allegory.  It is just as historical in character as the rest of Genesis.   If the author purposely intends for us to take as history what is not historical in the first part of Genesis, then what is there to say that the same thing didn't happen in other parts of the Bible?

 

It is useless because what you are proposing, if you follow this to its logical conclusion is a Bible that can't really be trusted to correctly relate what is historical from what is not historical.  That also casts a cloud of doubt over its doctrinal integirty as well.  The Bible connects its doctrine to events of history it records.  So if the Bible can't be trusted on the things that can be historically verified, how do we trust the doctrinal content that cannot be tested or verified historically?

[Guest shiloh357]

 

Candice how do you reconcile God's defined period of creation here by comparison?

Ex 20:8-11

8 "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,

10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor

your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor

your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth,

the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath

day and hallowed it.

NKJV

 

I'm not questioning it at all.

 

I'm questioning the assumption that God has lessor power if He took longer to create.

 

You manufactured an assumption I didn't make and tried to refute an argument I didn't raise.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

 

 

 

There are two ways. One is, and will take forever, going through each book, each subsection and grouping of verses, and studying those out independently. That's what I did for a sufficient amount to establish the likelihood of the resurrection. The second is reading without worrying about it much and the Spirit seems to use certain passages to communicate things to me. I figure between those two extremes is again the answer I should settle on in general. It's a work in progress. 

So when Paul says that ALL Scripture is inspired by God, why do you reject that claim of Scripture?   Was that part of the Bible that wasn't inspired?  

 

It is inspired. The question is what does the inspiration entail.As I told you earlier, God may have inspired content into authors and then allowed them a measure of leeway as to how to present concepts. 

 

God did not circumvent their personalities, but the information must be transmitted without error, or there is no point in reading the Bible.  If you cannot trust that what you are reading is true, then the Bible is pretty much useless.

 

It's not useless. I was able to, through very very slow reading and questioning everything, come to accept Jesus' resurrection-- and that was while being hyper-skeptical. Thinking that God allowed the authors to use some of their own concepts to explain ideas doesn't suddenly make the Bible entirely false or imply it's full of errors. You keep painting a false dilemma. I deny there is one.

 

I've stated this several times now because what you are saying simply does not follow.

 

The problem is that you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to "their own concepts."  Their cultural understanding the world would, if unchecked, flavor how the Bible would look. 

 

My point earlier is that the Bible contains doctrines and principles that were contrary to the conventional wisdom of the time period.  The Bible would be full of errors if the Bible is filtered through human concpeptions before it written down.  God did not circumvent their peronsalities, but that does not mean that they were relating God's ideas according to their own understanding. 

 

The principles and doctrines that God espouses in Scripture are outside the conventional wisdom and understanding and cannot be communicated in terms of human understanding.  In fact your suggestion violates a well-known biblical passage:

 

For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

(2Pe 1:17-21)

 

In this passage, Peter is relating the story of transfiguration when he heard God's voice.  Peter is saying that Bible is more reliable than his own eyewitness testimony and that the "prophecy" of Scripture did not come about by human "interpretation."  The Greek word for "interpretation" is better understood as human opinion or understanding.  He goes on to say that it did not come about by the will (imagination, intellect or impulse) of man but they spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

 

The word "prophecy" doesn't simply refer to the act of foretelling, but of "forthtelling."  The entire word of God is "prophecy" in the boader sense of the forthtelling or teaching of truth.   According to this passage and according to II Tim. 3:16, the notion that the writers of Scripture were using their own understanding to relate God's word to us is categorically denied by  both Peter and Paul.