Michael Welch wrote on May 8, 2008 12:14 PM:
" In the creation God constructs the 'heavens and the earth' from a kind of primordial muck, 'chaos,' that pre-exists obviously. The importance of the Genesis mythology is that worldly existence is to be dependent on God and His will, or whim for that matter. The Adam and Eve story appears as a somewhat simplistic explanation for a world which is NOT 'perfect' as it was of course when God first made it, presumably. (The woman gets the primary blame interestingly, or maybe not surprisingly.) And from then on God is so often irascible, testy and downright murderous toward His creation; His is a bizarre sort of attraction to or 'love' for His 'creatures'... "
Senior Advocate wrote on May 8, 2008 10:31 AM:
" To Phil O'Bates: I have no dispute with your suggestions or findings. Much of the reading I have done supports your statements. Those who continue to study in this area point out that their is factual material in all of the writings. However even in the 1st 100 years after Jesus, the writers own influences and understandings in the light of the political and religeous atmosphere at the time needs to be understood in order to extract the most acurate information. their is also the vast differences in the translations of the various words in different languages and questions as to their specific meanings at the time used. "
UncommonTater wrote on May 7, 2008 11:45 PM:
" To Eddie: Don Richardson, in his best seller _Eternity in Their Hearts_, talks about ancient religious traditions in Burma/Myanmar, China, Korea, Central America and elsewhere, and the points they have in common. This and other books such as _Christ in Ancient Vedas_ suggest that Jesus is the fulfillment of the elements of truth in these diverse traditions. Brojendra Bannerjee has said, in effect, that 95% of Hinduism is valid, and that it just needs a mediator and sin-bearer. "
UncommonTater wrote on May 7, 2008 11:36 PM:
" To Senior Advocate: You might want to check out _The Gods of War: Is Religion the Primary Cause of Violent Conflict?_, by Meic Pearse http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/toc/code=3490
Dr. Gordon Fee has shown how some of the more recently discover codices of the New Testament are more reliable than manuscripts that earlier scholars had used. "
UncommonTater wrote on May 7, 2008 11:27 PM:
" I recommend Darrel Falk, _Coming to Peace with Science_; Francis Collins, _The Language of God_, and possibly Richard Colling, _Random Designer_ and theistic-evolution.com. The American Scientific Affiliation discusses these issues. From a poem of mine: "We've got the nucleotides, C, G, T and A/If they could get together, we could have DNA./Evolve Me, Jesus, let the pieces fit..." "
Eddie wrote on May 7, 2008 7:19 PM:
" Phil, you're funny.....a bit delusional, but still funny. OK, sure. You're ancient myths are Truth, but everyone else's are just make-believe.....LOL. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on May 7, 2008 6:58 PM:
" Eddie,
It's so sad to see your desire to avoid the obvious parallels between how the Genesis Creation story follows what would be needed in the correct order for life. The fact that you think the story of Earth on the back of a turtle is just as credible shows how badly you want to ignore God and the truth. I can't make you believe the truth, that's up to you. If you sincerely follow the evidence, you will see the Genesis account is far more credible than any other creation account. "
Eddie wrote on May 7, 2008 5:05 PM:
" Phil, we don't know for sure if there was a "beginning". For all we know, the universe could be in an endless cycle of Big Bang/Big Crunch events. Again, we know so little of the universe and its workings that it is the height of arrogance to claim knowledge of it. Your ancient mythology, like many others, is so generalized that it can be easily fit to parallel scientific theories. There is no reason for anyone to see the Genesis story as more "factual" than countless other stories. "
Michael Welch wrote on May 7, 2008 1:55 PM:
" The particular origins of the universe are still in question as I understand and the explanation that the biblical progression in Genesis parallels, well, evolution is precisely why the Vatican has stated that there is no inherent conflict between evolution and belief in the God of the Bible. Eastern mythologies are basically premised on the idea that origins don't really matter; it is 'now' that matters so if you MUST have a creation myth, one is as good as another. As for the Nordic story, the earth and humankind arising from primordial violence -- that's an interesting psychological insight that essentially echoes the Cain-Abel myth... "
Phil O'Bates wrote on May 7, 2008 12:19 PM:
" One last thing Senior Advocate,
The Bible we have today is the same words and letters that the first century Christians had before Rome and Catholicism came up with their own twists of traditions. There are manuscripts and copies of texts that date to the first and second century which confirm this. There are also letters from early first, second, and third century Christians that contain all of the New Testament minus only about 11 verses. It wasn't until Constantine that the Catholic dogma arose. (http://www.carm.org/questions/rewritten.htm)(http://www.carm.org/questions/rewritten.htm) "
Phil O'Bates wrote on May 7, 2008 12:10 PM:
" Senior Advocate,
Now compare Genesis consistancy with what we know to be true through science to other creation stories: The Chinese creation myth of Pan-gu. He evolved inside a gigantic cosmic egg, which contained all the elements of the universe totally intermixed together. P'an Ku grew by about 10 feet each day. In the Norse creation myth where the primordial giant Ymir is killed by Odin, Vili and Ve. The earth is formed from the dead body of Ymir. Similarily in the Babylonian myth their god Marduk fights and kills Tiamat, the primordial goddess of the ocean. He cuts her body in two. One half becomes the sky, the other half the earth. Then there is the Indian myth of the Earth on the back of a giant turtle.
"
Phil O'Bates wrote on May 7, 2008 12:02 PM:
" Dear Senior Advocate,
Here are just a few facts in Genesis that are scientifically accurate: There was a beginning: Most ancient religions believed the universe had existed forever. Until the middle of the twentieth century even many scientists still believed the universe had always existed. Original conditions were not suited for life: Whatever the precise condition of earths primordial atmosphere might have been, scientists agree it could not have supported life. Non-life preceded life. Vegetation preceded animal life: According to Genesis, God created plant life at the end of the third day. This is consistent with natural science, which claims[6] amino acids form proteins or RNA which lead to living organisms. Mankind appears at the end. "
Senior Advocate wrote on May 7, 2008 11:14 AM:
" The genesis account is a story handed down by mouth for eons and finnaly written down. It holds about as much factual validity as any story passsed on by mouth. By the time a story is retold a dozen times it is so far off the mark that their is no credibility left. Besides given the fact also that more and more scholars are verifying that the whole bible has been manipulated to the requirement of the Vatican of these many centuries.
"
county resident wrote on May 7, 2008 8:14 AM:
" Eddie is quoting from Oprahs guru. It takes more faith to believe in nothing then to honestly review the truth and chnage your beliefs once it is revealed. The Genesis account has more documented support than any other account for creation. "
Eddie wrote on May 7, 2008 5:05 AM:
" Arrogance is a curse upon Humanity, isn't it? So many people (Believers and non-believers) cause so much harm, just because they have some pathological need to be "Right", and to have "all the answers". It ranges from one man bullying his family to kings and popes and presidents waging wars and slaughtering millions.....and all because of their "beliefs". I still have hope that Humanity will outgrow this childish dysfunction and become truly enlightened......someday. "
Senior Advocate wrote on May 5, 2008 9:02 AM:
" To Eddie: You are correct. No one knows. Yet think of all the damage that has been and is being done because so many think they know. They kill each other physically and mentaly over their non-knowing. How sad. They berate each others beliefs, create new and revised fairy tales and give their mental and physical lives up over these theories. What a terrible waste for humanity. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on May 4, 2008 9:23 PM:
" eddie,
I didn't go through any mental gymnastics to learn of Genesis's truth, the Holy Spirit reveals the truth of the Bible to all who accept Jesus as savior. I understand why you don't place Genesis's account any higher than other creation stories. You see eddie, this is a matter of faith, that is why it is posted on the faith page. Now, if you want to talk about science or archeology, everything that has been found or observed has not disproven the Genesis account. Does that 'prove' it? No. But if you are looking for scientic (natural) proof of a supernatural event, you will not find it, especially on a Faith page. "
Eddie wrote on May 4, 2008 4:53 PM:
" I can't imagine the mental gymnastics through which people go to convince themselves that some Bronze Age myth is true. The story of Genesis is no more "true" than any other creation myth....and there are thousands of them. Personally, I find the ancient myths of East Asia and Central America to be the most interesting. "
Michael Welch wrote on May 4, 2008 3:14 PM:
" Don't ask (of) me nuthin'!?... "
Phil O'Bates wrote on May 4, 2008 9:54 AM:
" I don't see God's creation asking anything, I see God's creation revealing God. If a person chooses to see the complexities of nature and man as the combination of lucky circumstances guided by nothing, then that is their choice. I can't imagine what kind of mental gymnastics a person goes through to convince themselves of that, but I'm sure God is saddened when His Creation that He made in His own likeness refuses to acknowledge Him. As for the Biblical account of Creation, mark me down as one who accepts it all as truth. "
Michael Welch wrote on May 3, 2008 1:12 PM:
" The best idea about 'God' I think is that of identifying our collective reality as 'God' which I guess would not be a pantheistic view alone but also a panENtheistic view that whatever is beyond our understanding and perception can be called 'God' also. Again I admit this is more an 'eastern,' i. e. Hindu and Buddhist view, than that of the western monotheisms. The mystery of creation or existence (since 'creation' as an incident is somewhat beyond us really) is that we don't know why and why it is as it is. Hindus and Buddhists merely shrug -- what is, is -- but in the west we want, it seems, an ongoing narrative with beginning, middle and, well, inevitable end... "
Michael Welch wrote on May 3, 2008 11:56 AM:
" The Jains of India often wear a mouth and nose mask not to keep out the pollution but so that they may not inadvertently suck in some tiny insect; such is THEIR 'reverence for life.' Jainists are vegetarians of course but even eating something that was once alive disturbs them so the disciplinary objective is to continually limit one's food intake to the point of not eating at all. Then one's own life -- which is sacred too -- is threatened but as Joseph Campbell once noted ALL religions have their points of absurdity. Why am I 'I' and not 'you' and vice versa? Actually Hinduism and Buddhism say the differentiation is merely an illusion -- we are all of us 'we' AND 'all'... "
county resident wrote on May 3, 2008 10:46 AM:
" To Ryeguy:
Science is the exploration of the creation of God. It proves and explains His nature and charater. Science is the pursuit of God. "
Eddie wrote on May 3, 2008 9:53 AM:
" How do I explain "Creation"? I don't explain it. We are but children when it comes to understanding how the universe came to be. We know next to nothing about how it happened, and we can only speculate as to "why" it happened. There may not even be a "why". All we can do is observe and try to measure the remnants of that beginning. Someday, if/when we venture "outside" of our universe, we may be able to explain how it all happened. Until then, we have nothing but speculations and mythologies. "
ryeguy wrote on May 3, 2008 8:47 AM:
" Science attempts to explain HOW we got here, the mechanism, the process, the laws that govern physics, chemistry, and biology. Science by its nature does not even venture into the "WHY" arena. This is where religious fundamentalists go wrong - they confuse the how of science with the why of their religious beliefs and try to impose those whys on all of us in religiously oriented "science" curricula. Science does not need religion or god to answer its questions since the questions reside entirely within nature. That does not mean scientists are atheists. It means they do not confuse testable hypotheses with faith or the written word of the bible. And it certainly does not mean that they find no awe in the workings of the universe. "