Quote:
Originally Posted by stuck_in_chuk
Here's the thing - it seems to me the concept of "fall of man" causing mass extinction is incompatible with the concept of evolution. For instance, trilobites have been extinct for roughly 250 million years, much before any human was around to possibly be blamed for everything. Also, the so-called "Champagne Supernova" is from a galaxy roughly 4 billion light years away, meaning that the star exploded roughly 4 billion years before any man was around to fall. To say that extinctions and supernovae were caused by 2 people eating the wrong piece of fruit seems absurd.
It is possible that evolution is a demonstration of a designer, but that contradicts the idea of a "fall of man". Theists argue that either God created 2 people (who displeased him), or he set up in motion the rules that eventually ended up with people. And who determines who the first humans were? Were they australopithecines, or neanderthals, or cro-magnon? How did they displease God? Or, did God let evolution create animal and plant diversity, and then created 2 separate beings?
The creation story of the book of Genesis is either literally true, an allegory, or complete fiction. If its literal truth, then God really did not plan things well. He figured out that the animals need to have sex to procreate, but he initially created only one male human. Before creating a woman, God paraded all the animals in front of him looking for a compatible "help meet" (Gen. 2:19-21). Only after Adam rejected all the animals did God think to make a woman for him. The problem with using the bible as an allegorical tool is interpreting what is literal truth, and what is allegory. If we accept that the earth wasn't created in 6 literal days 6000-odd years ago, do we also reject as allegory the story of Jonah and the whale? Noah's ark? The virgin birth? The resurrection? The talking snake? Original sin? Parting of the Red Sea? The 10 Commandments? The burning bush? Lot's wife turning into a pillar of salt? The feeding of the 5000? Jesus' miracles? Heaven? Hell? Satan? Angels? Demons?
The fact is, the God as described in the old testament is a jealous, capricious genocidal maniac who supports slavery. |
As I've said, it's not something I easily grasp and it's not something I have every answer for. I'm definitely still reading and discussing and learning (which is why I like threads like this that don't devolve into rubbish mudslinging).
Fitting my understanding of "The Fall" as literally described in Genesis into a current scientifically sound understanding of history may not be possible. Maybe it's not meant to be.
One of the main problems I have with the
link T@T offered a few pages back is this idea that the Bible was (or should've been) written to a timeless, universal audience. First of all, this is strictly impossible (though I believe the Holy Spirit offers guidance, instruction and wisdom to believers if they ask for it and wait for it - sometimes it is subtle). Furthermore, it seems sensible that we'd try to read these stories in the context of their time. If we're interested and so inclined, it might be possible to find out information about when it was written, who the author was, and who the intended audience was.
After some very brief searching on the subject, I came up with a couple of references to a book by Tremper Longman III, called
How to Read Genesis. Here's a link to an excerpt [
in pdf format]. Page 4 of the pdf, or 22 of the book, contains an interesting paragraph:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Longman III
"The historical, cultural and literary distance we are at from the time of the author makes Genesis difficult to grasp without study. Indeed, one of the biggest mistakes we can make in interpretation is to read it as if it were written for us today. For instance, later we will criticize those who read Genesis 1—2 as if it was an apologetic against modern scientific understanding of the origins of the world (Darwin), when in actuality it was an apologetic against rival ancient understandings of creation (Enuma Elish)."
|
I have not read up on the this to verify it's claims for myself (though I intend to), but I just think it goes to show that there is most certainly more than meets the eye in the Genesis account.
As for the off-putting characteristics of God as described in various parts of the Bible, here are my thoughts:
jealousy. He created us to interact with us and for us to worship Him - yes, I'd call that jealousy, and yes, I'd call it justified. (This is
hugely hypothetical, but I know I'd get jealous if I created a high-tech robot with AI and some "free will" - with a few important parameters for safe functioning - and it decided not to follow some of those parameters, got broken, searched everywhere
but me for a repairman, eventually found a mediocre temporary "fix", then agreed to act as the spokesrobot for that other guy.
)
capriciousness. Fair enough. I guess my point would be that He can do as He wishes; His will and His ways are beyond our understanding and there "must" be a good reason for it - such as the anthropological hypothesis offered in your link. That said, I can understand why this explanation might not be fully satisfying to you.
genocidal. It's true. No explanation other than to say that certain actions deserve consequences. We don't know how many warnings were offered or just what the depths of these people's evils were. From my perspective, I agree that genocide seems... harsh. As you might expect me to, I defer to God's divine wisdom and put it on Him. He can take it.
slaver. I can't say I'm a proponent of slavery, but humanity has been generally okay with it in some form or another for millennia. I'm not going to be the one to put my view on something like slavery above God's. There are specific qualifications laid out in the Bible that keep it ... well, humane. So, even inasmuch as I would not like to see slavery brought back to North America (for example), it's existence in ancient times was in a different context and surely looked different then than it did more recently in our world's history. Could it be that slavery can be done rightly and wrongly? I won't be the one to judge.