Genesis

[Circle_Master]

Isn't it possible that God just spoke to the ancients in terms and images that they could understand? Much like we speak to children differently than adults?

perhaps. If you look at Genesis 1 it is set up much like it was orally told. Repeated words "there was evening and there was morning". Even the structure

Day 1 Heavens/Earth Day 4 Sun/Moon

Day 2 Water/Sky Day 5 Fish!

Day 3 Earth/Water Day 6 Animals!

It also has 'tohu va bohu'. In the beginning the earth was "tohu va bohu". Can be many translations but the basic idea is "unformed and unfilled". The first 3 days are forming, the next 3 filling.

If you notice, Genesis is also structured around 'toledot' in Hebrew. Or 'This is the account of'. The very first one starts as well in Genesis 2:4 - so what is before it is not considered an account, it may have been added, or placed on from something else.

The images presented are terms which everyone would understand. God is sovereign and God is bigger than our universe. Fitting for the beggining of our Scriptures I would think and for the Israelites who were about to enter Canaan.

[Norseman82]

Actually, the reason I bring this up is that Genesis talks about a "dome" or "firmament" that separates the earth from the waters in the sky. If this were not simply God speaking in terms of the ancient mind, I would have thought that NASA would have run into the dome on one of its missions by now.

[Circle_Master]

Actually, the reason I bring this up is that Genesis talks about a "dome" or "firmament" that separates the earth from the waters in the sky. If this were not simply God speaking in terms of the ancient mind, I would have thought that NASA would have run into the dome on one of its missions by now.

It was a seperation of water norse. And it was part of what crashed down when the flood hit. The 'dome' of water people have made projections - and it would have blocked out UV rays and other stuff making it possible for man to live hundreds of years.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Found a good article about the Catholic Church and evolution/Genesis:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/HUMANITY/EVOLUTN.TXT

The Church has maintained that the first three chapters of Genesis contain historical truth.  Their inspired author used a popular literary form of

his day to explain certain historical facts of Creation.  These were named

specifically by the Pontifical Biblical Commission, with the approval of

Pope Pius X in 1909.  The official document states that the literal

historical meaning of the first three chapters of Genesis could not be

doubted in regard to:

  "the creation of all things by God at the beginning of time; the   

special creation of man; the formation of the first woman from the   

first man; the unity of the human race; the original happiness of    our

first parents in the state of justice, integrity, and immortality;    the

command given by God to man to test his obedience; the transgression    of

the divine command at the instigation of the devil under the form of    a

serpent; the degradation of our first parents from that primeval state   

of innocence; and the promise of a future redeemer."

The bottom line:

So, from the Catholic point of view, the scientific questions of  evolution

are largely left open to debate.  Evolutionary hypotheses which  attempt to

explain the development of living things may be accepted  except where they

conflict with these few explicit truths.

[jasJis]

Isn't it possible that God just spoke to the ancients in terms and images that they could understand? Much like we speak to children differently than adults?

Off topic, but...

Sacraments are a way God speaks and gives grace in a way that we are more likely to understand (but not completely).

[cmotherofpirl]

Actually, the reason I bring this up is that Genesis talks about a "dome" or "firmament" that separates the earth from the waters in the sky. If this were not simply God speaking in terms of the ancient mind, I would have thought that NASA would have run into the dome on one of its missions by now.

THe firmament of waters is way the hebrews described the part of the sky where the rain came from.

Genesis can be divided into 2 parts: prehistory, and history. The teaching stories are a prehistory prologue telling us God made the universe and then this world and us in particular. History starts with Abraham.

The entire book of Genesis can actually be looked on as a prologue to the most important event in the OT: the Exodus.

[TABBY]

What is this based on?  I would be interested to look at it.  Genesis 1 is of an interest to me.

Some schlars have different theories...and this is one of them

I took an Old testament theology class and I learned it there...and a book called "who wrote the bible" exaplains this....

Edited January 7, 2004 by TABBY

[Circle_Master]

could you find the author or editor for me?

[cmotherofpirl]

WE were taught that as well in OT class. Its logical. People had to invent writing and alphabets before they could write. THe beginning of the OT is a collection of oral traditions they were finally written down arouind the time of the exodus.

[Circle_Master]

WE were taught that as well in OT class. Its logical. People had to invent writing and alphabets before they could  write.  THe beginning of the OT is a collection of oral traditions they were finally written down arouind the time of the exodus.

everything in genesis would be that. it is being argued that genesis 1 was added after genesis 2 though - what would indicate this.

Edited January 7, 2004 by Circle_Master

[TABBY]

could you find the author or editor for me?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...=glance&s=books

Chapter 2 it talks about the J and E text There is actually 4 total I believe the thrid one is I believe "P", and the other one is "D"

you know the noah story one says two pairs and the other says 7 one is older than the other.

There is other books that goes in more detail on it, but this book is good.

Edited January 7, 2004 by TABBY

[Circle_Master]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...=glance&s=books

Chapter 2 it talks about the J and E text There is actually 4 total I believe the thrid one is I believe "P", and the other one is "D"

you know the noah story one says two pairs and the other says 7 one is older than the other.

There is other books that goes in more detail on it, but this book is good.

JEDP is complete carp. Read the following site for rebuttals against it. Here is a mockery of it as well by Mark Shea (http://www.mark-shea.com/LOTR.html).

http://www.tektonics.org/TK-J.html

JEDP was created by liberals attempting to discredit the bible. It is referred to as 'Higher Source Criticism'.

[TABBY]

JEDP is complete carp. Read the following site for rebuttals against it. Here is a mockery of it as well by Mark Shea (http://www.mark-shea.com/LOTR.html).

http://www.tektonics.org/TK-J.html

JEDP was created by liberals attempting to discredit the bible. It is referred to as 'Higher Source Criticism'.

All I said was in my previous about different schlars has different theories...

and this was one of them.

[Circle_Master]

All I said was in my previous about different schlars has different theories...

and this was one of them.

ooo I hit 800 posts

anyway

Yeah, I just want to warn you that this is very liberal stuff. It contracts Papal authority immediately as it builds on a premise that the Bible is not inerrant. It is an attempt to figure out how it got put together as it is and it doesn't believe Moses actually wrote the pentateuch. I would suggest you stay away from things such as that until you have done a little studying against it on your own first. That tektonics webpage has some well done articles dealing with it.

[TABBY]

ooo  I hit 800 posts

anyway

Yeah, I just want to warn you that this is very liberal stuff.  It contracts Papal authority immediately as it builds on a premise that the Bible is not inerrant.  It is an attempt to figure out how it got put together as it is and it doesn't believe Moses actually wrote the pentateuch.  I would suggest you stay away from things such as that until you have done a little studying against it on your own first.  That tektonics webpage has some well done articles dealing with it.

I am NOT stating it is factual or anything....all I said was ONE of the theories these schlars have/had.

Actually in class when we spoke about the subject of ONE of many theories (no we did NOT use the book in class it was just mentioned to read), and from what I learned it wasnt to prove the bible was wrong at all....actually it was taught the other way around. Actually the teacher said, it may sound counerdictory but it is not, at that time the point was to make is it happened (this was stated in class).

Maybe the ones who adapted this theory used this theory to go against the bible?

Again...my major is regious studies, and I do know alot of different theories (which actually helps MY faith THAT much stronger), and all I was doing was providing one of MANY theories...there is actually alot of different theories out in this world and some is far fetched.

Edited January 7, 2004 by TABBY