So I've Actually Decided to *Read* a Bible

[NashVegas]

Catholic Press, Chicago, copyright 1950. In Genesis. A couple of quick questions, and I'm sure there will be many more:

1. How the hell can anyone expect school kids to study creationism? It's a freaking page and a half long. How do you stretch that out to a semester or more when the source text is a page and a half long?

2. Adam and company's extraordinarily long lives. Average span: 925 years or so. Considering the pro-biblical argument that the 7 days of creation could have, in fact, been thousands of years each, that would put Adam and descendents' lifespans in the ... I don't want to think about it. But. If they were living that long, seems that it could only be the result of eating fruit off the tree of life, which was specifically guarded against them. Either they found a back door into the garden or they were all space aliens.

That's it for now.

[LiberalAndProud]

1. I had that lesson in junior high ... the clay and the breath of life

1/2 hour of lecture and I knew the theory of creation.

it was an easy test (just kidding)

[Journeyman]

8. Sorry you had to spend so much time on it . . .

I learned my complete lesson from Gene McDaniels in just a couple minutes back in 1961 on Top 40 Radio. . .


A Hundred Pounds of Clay
Sung by: Gene McDaniels

(Written by Bob Elgin, Luther Dixon, and Kay Roger)

He took a hundred pounds of clay
And then He said, "Hey, listen"
"I'm gonna fix this-a world today"
"Because I know what's missin' "
Then He rolled his big sleeves up
And a brand-new world began
He created woman and-a lots of lovin' for a man
Whoa-oh-oh, yes he did

With just a hundred pounds of clay
He made my life worth livin'
And I will thank Him every day
For every kiss you're givin'
And I'll thank Him every night
For the arms that are holdin' me tight
And He did it all with just a hundred pounds of clay
Yes he did, whoa-oh, yes He did

Now can'tcha just see Him a-walkin' 'round and 'round
Pickin' the clay uppa off the ground?
Doin' just what He should do
To make a livin' dream like you

He rolled His big sleeves up
And a brand-new world began
He created a woman and-a lots of lovin' for a man
Whoa-oh-oh, yes he did
With just a hundred pounds of clay

FADE
People, let me tall ya what He did
With just a hundred pounds of clay

[clydefrand]

2. I hope the kids are smart enough to ask how those people

got in the Land of Nod so that Cain would have someone to marry after he was banished with a mark on his forehead. Who the hell would know what the mark meant since NO ONE else existed but the happy little family of Adam and Eve and now only Cain since brother Abel has been slain?

[Arugula Latte]

3. Yeah, and how did Cain and Abel procreate?

MOM was the only female around ... hmmmm ... now those are some Family Values right there!

[NMMNG]

10. The fundies always conveniently gloss over that one

As well as a bunch of other stuff.

Da Bible sez homosexuality is wrong


Yeah, well it also says you shouldn't be wearing that gold jewelry, cotton/polyester blend shirt, or be braiding your hair.


I don't let my kids watch tv, movies, read modern books or listen to modern music; they are all full of smut! They read the Bible.


Yeah, well the Bible has more incest, rape, murder, adultery, lying, thievery, genocide and "smut" than any modern book, movie or Eminem song. Good job warping your kids minds!




Fundies are so delusional

:rofl:

[loveable liberal]

15. when I took the King James Bible in college

The prof was great. we read the old testement and then analyzed what it said. Some of the things i remember is that there are actually two stories of creation, one where there was mention of a single group (incest) and another where there mentions groups outside the garden of eden (non-incest version). Also the 'Onan spillt his seed upon the ground' birth control method. Tom Oliphant made mention of that on the Al Franken show yesterday and I actually understood the reference.

Also, get a bible printed with large text. Its a lot easier.

[Free2BMe]

24. I really like Oliphant

[Brentos]

16. Genesis: In the Beginning - A Solution to the Genesis Conundrum

BTW: This is my writing, so no copyright issues exist.

Genesis: In the Beginning - A Solution to the Genesis Conundrum

The creation stories in Genesis have always held problems for me as an evolutionist and as a logical person. Following are the main issues with the creation stories:

Contradictions between two creation stories
Who do the children of Adam and Eve procreate with?
Why does God use the term “we” while creating mankind in Gen 1:26?
Science shows other human-like creatures in early history

The first issue is that if we are to take the Bible as a literal story, then the story contradicts itself. Genesis 1:1-2:4 is the first creation story, then Genesis 2:4-3:24 is a second creation story. Both involve the creation of man, yet they appear in different orders. In the first creation story, mankind is created on day 6 with the animals. In the second creation story, man is created before the plants and animals. If this is the true word, why is there a disconnect in the first two stories of the Bible?

The second problem is that the Bible never says whom the children of Adam and Eve marry and procreate with, though one could argue that Adam and Even had many other children that are not mentioned.

Third, why does God use the term “we” while creating mankind in Gen 1:26? It has been explained away as the royal we with God speaking to the heavenly host, but that seems a stretch in the context of it not being all throughout that way.

Fourth, science shows us that their were many other ape-like creatures (proto-humans, common ancestors, similar species; depending on your beliefs) that came before mankind. The Bible does not look into this, but that is not a major problem, as the Bible is a focusing document on the story of a chosen planet/people/person. Much else is left out, as it is not important to the story of the Bible.


It was while studying the Jewish Study Bible (Tanakh Translation- see resources), that I first learned something that I had never known. The first six days of creation are actually two parallel lines of creation from generalities or domains, to specifics or inhabitants of the domains (Tanakh 12).


If laid out in two stacks of three, the days correlate as follows:

(Day 1) Light ........../ lights: sun, moon stars (Day 4)
(Day 2) Sky, water ...../ birds, fish (Day 5)
(Day 3) Land and plants / land animals and humans (Day 6)
................Day 7 – The Sabbath.....................



A symmetrical beauty I had never seen before! It also lay bare that the first 6 days were the creation of everything in the natural world (possibly through evolution).


The second creation story then lays out the creation of the first human, Adam. This happens before the creation of plants and animals. Thus the stories don’t match up still. Or do they?


What if we lay out the days as stated:

Day 1: Light
Day 2: Sky
Day 3: Land/Plants
Day 4: Lights
Day 5: Fish/Birds
Day 6: Animals Humans


Then, if we study what the second creation story says, it tells us that God fashioned Adam out of clay and breathed life into him. Normally the difference from God calling into existence from afar everything in days 1-6 and his now hands-on approach in the second story is attributed to the second story being from the Priestly documents (a different source). But what if it is trying to tell us something; that the race of mankind (Homo sapiens) is special and different from normal creation. Suppose that days one through 6, God calls into being everything from afar, using the laws of physics and quantum mechanics that He created. Everything is created up through and including all of mankind’s ancestors (ex. Homo habilus, Homo erectus, etc.). Now, if we agree something special is going on, the second creation is not really a second creation, but
is pulled out from the basic creation story to show its importance to God. In this story, God tells us that Adam was created from the soil (after land was created) and before plants. This would tell us that Adam was created on Day 3. This also matches that on day 3 God created the plants, and in the second story, right after creating Adam, God creates a Garden in the east of Eden, thus creating plants on the same day the first story claims he is creating plants. This signifies that Eden is special, and Adam is special. Next, God creates the animals in both stories (day 6) and then creates Eve. Thus, Eve was created from Adam on Day 6.


Day 1: Light
Day 2: Sky
Day 3: Land/Plants (Adam)
Day 4: Lights
Day 5: Fish/Birds
Day 6: Animals, humans (Eve)

Now, looking at the completed time-line, we see why God was using the term “we” while creating mankind on Day 6. He had already created Adam and was speaking to him. Creating mankind in the image of God (free-will) and Adam (physicality). This creation of the people of earth (not of Eden, where the special line was kept) allows for the interbreeding of Adam and Eve’s children with the children of mankind who already existed on earth at the time of the expulsion.

copyright (c) 2005 B. Austin Price

[grumpy old fart]

17. Why work so hard to shoe horn all this nonsense into coherence?

Just accept that it's a primitive people trying to explain what to them was the unexplainable. Tom Cruise and the Scientologists have these really great stories too. As do the Hindus, etc. Do we really need to work so hard to wrap our minds around the concocted minutiae of these superstitions?

[Brentos]

18. Why work so hard to disprove to others that which they belive?

Just accept that people believe in a higher power, and the possibility that they are right, along with the possibility that they are wrong.

Just accept that trolling for Christians, feeding them bait, is just mean.

Just accept that many Christians are good, caring people, and have feelings that, too, can be hurt.

Just accept that they are willing to debate and discuss their beliefs, but if one is not willing to attempt to actually learn about what they are saying, and how ancient documents actually have to be read in the cultural, geographic, and socio-context of their times, then one cares not for debating, but only for arguing.

Just accept that many Christians are also trolling jerks themselves, but I am not one.

Just accept, that Atheists, too, must believe in something...while not a deity, they must believe in laws, or codes, or science, or perception, or philosophy.

[grumpy old fart]

19. The point is, it's not "hard work" at all to disprove fairy tales.....

while warping and reshaping ancient documents beyond the cultural, geographic and socio-context of their times is positively exhausting.

I understand and accept belief, but why the doomed attempt to make man made texts into something they clearly are not?

Peace be with you.

[Brentos]

20. Actually....

it is hard to disprove something...in fact, it is nearly impossible to prove a negative. Which is why our legal system is based on innocent until proven guilty. The onus is on proving something is, not isn't. Since religion can't be proven it "is" it is a belief. Since religion can't be proven it "isn't" it is a possibility.

Otherwise...prove to me there is no God. The claims is that it is easy to prove a negative. Beyond reasonable doubt. Make me believe their is no belief?

How could you do this? It is an internal issue, an I can't see anything you could say to make me change my belief. You could give me evidence of this or that, that may change the way I believe something, but not the belief itself. That is up to me.

-Peace, my friend.

[grumpy old fart]

21. Of course I can't prove to you there is no God, but Proving to a ......

reasonable degree of certainty that certain events could not, or did not, happen in the real world is another matter altogether.

[alrightjim]

22. We can't decide what is worth studying

Hi grumpy old fart. Lots of things come together to make up this world and there is nothing wrong with studying it all. Maybe it is a waste of time for you, or me, but if somebody is willing to apply their intellect and industry to further edify some matter I am all for it.

No guy is so smart he can determine what should be studied and what should be forgotten. I think it is a pretty good idea to remember as much as we can, now that we know we might need it. I don't know how many times I crumbled up and chucked some paper in college I damn well needed later on.

Right now, if I wanted, I could list my ten favorite Star Trek episodes. I am sure some trekkie has spent many long hours, maybe weeks, putting all 70 plus episodes in order of quality or significance. Poor sad person, sure, but I am happy people are willing to scrutinize and categorize to that degree and can tell us with accuracy how many episodes Bones said "I'm a doctor, Jim, not a..."

Do you know who the most famous person in the world was in 1890? Most people don't. But some person certainly was. It was obviously common knowledge then.

Jimmy

[catbert836]

4. Read "Ishmael"

by Daniel Quinn. His interpretation of Genesis is excellent, saying that Cain and Abel were two groups of people, Cain being the settled farmers of Mesopotamia and Abel the Semetic hunter-gatherers. The knowledge of good and evil was how to farm... so really, our theory of Creation is just a piece of Semetic war propaganda.

[clydefrand]

6. Sounds better than the traditional interpretation!

[CatholicEdHead]

7. Very intresting

I have not heard that theory before.

[NashVegas]

9. Interesting

It did seem curious that God blew off Cain's offering for no apparent reason.

[Lefty_the_Right]

5. Cain was sent to the land of Nod where he knew his wife

Where did she come from?

[AirForceof1]

23. Cains Wife

Well according to the Hebrew version of the Old Testament Before Eve God created Lilith. But Lilith didn't like the idea of having to be subservient to Adam and left the Garden of Eden on her own. Then the big G created Eve. So there was at least 1 more women running around for Cain to hook up with.

[onager]

11. A couple of links for you

These will be useful for interpreting what you're reading, without any nonsensical Xian shenanigans. ("That's allegory, no, wait, it's historically accurate!!!")

Skeptic's Annotated Bible:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/

"Is It God's Word?" by Joseph Wheless, also the author of "Forgery In Christianity." His books were out of print for many decades. Guess why. Wheless, who IIRC understood several ancient languages, literally took the Bible apart and compared the chapters line-by-line.

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/is_it_gods_word/index.shtml

[Igel]

12. I can summarize evolution in a page or two.

1. And yet, the number of pages dedicated to it is large. Discussing problems, interpretations, evidence, counter-evidence ...

Then again, I remember spending what must have been the better part of a week on spontaneous generation in 9th grade biology. Evidence for, evidence against, argumentation about it, the experiments that squashed it. Creationism was already becoming an issue--it was horrible. Spontaneous generation ... not a problem, nobody believed it; well, that's not true, I actually have run into people who believed it, but that's another headache.

2. The lifespans reported seems to decrease sharply post-Flood, and decrease even before that, so the average may be deceiving; in any event, it's a strange game to play. On the other hand, there's no guarantee that the 'days' in early Genesis were the same as the 'days' later in Genesis; the "day = 1000 years" folks view lifespans as actual years, as we know them, and take the "days of creation" as something completely different from usual 'days'. You start interpreting and changing the values of purported constants, without watching where the boundaries are, and strange results follow.

I've seen some rather fruity interpretations of all this, best summed up as "quirky versions of entropy."

[panzerfaust]

13. Make sure you read the RIGHT one

For, if not, the gaping pit of Hell awaits you ... for all eternity.

[SangamonTaylor]

14. that's great, although i find it tough to read starting @ genesis

Genesis starts off so simple and quickly turns confusing (at least when I was growing up it was).

Just recently, I started doing a daily scripture reading (the daily lectionary @ pcusa.org). Not long after I took the plunge and bought myself a nice annotated study bible (Oxford's New Revised Standard Edition--I highly recommend it...it eliminates much of the gender bias, and the notes help to explain the subtleties of the verses) and it has become an integral part of my daily life.

I guess I've come full circle. Raised in a Presbyterian church, I explored other religions during college, and towards the end of law school I came to realize how much spirituality has in common among all religions, but that being a Christian was just where I felt most comfortable.

Right now, I'm on a 2 year cycle (reading a morning and evening psalm, a passage from the OT, a gospel, and a epistle every day) and will have the OT read in 2 years and the NT read through twice.

[ollie79]

25. Well

Creationism is not just about studying Genesis. There is a lot of scienticsts who teach or study intelligent design. William Dembski (I think) is one of the more famous intelligent design thinkers.