The Bible as far as I am concerned is made of some fact and mostly fiction. It was written by men and from different viewpoints.Gensis is definitely a fairytale book.
Do you think that the Book of "Genesis" is a fairytale?
by booker-t 26 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
OpenFireGlass
Personally, I think the ENTIRE freaking bible is a Fairy Tale.
that's more/less what I was saying... like... I believe in Paul Bunyon, but all references and stories about him are fairytales... I mean who else could have made all those ugly clearcuts in the Redwoods?.... musta been Paul Bunyon....
-
luna2
Before the dubs came around, the Bible confused me. It seemed to be a concoction of legends, myths, some actual history and ancient philosophies. The JWs put many things into neat boxes and lined them up in rows that appeared to make sense at first glance. My desire for straight, black and white answers to questions and clearly defined expectations fed right into the JW myth.
The Bible has so many contradictory things to say that if you are careful of your focus, you can cobble together a rationale for just about anything. It took me over 20 years to tear away the veil I allowed the dubs to toss over my head and finally understand this. Now I think that the Bible is a concoction of legends, myths, some actual history and ancient philosophies. Amazing. I went in a complete circle and ended up right where I started.
-
lovelylil
The thought that the entire bible is a fairy tale simply does not hold up. Becuase the ancient nations that existed back then we know were real by artifacts that were found. The gods they worshipped and religious customs mentioned in the bible did exist as discoveries in ancient artifacts backs that up. Some of the people that at one time were thought to be made up like Nebuchadnezzer was determined to be a factual person when a tablet was found with his name on it. The bible is not a science book but does agree with science in many ways: the earth is a sphere, or circle, the Israelites had good sanitation & cleanliness habits, animals reproduce according to their kinds, there is a "book" where all our parts are written down before birth (DNA?) and there are other things too. other records in the bible include geneology and actual dates too. So this part does not sound like a fairy tale.
I believe the bible is very rich with many parts that compliment each other. We have, tradition and customs, ancient religious practices, historical records, poetry, prophecy, possible fables, signs and symbols and current events, all rolled into one. But total fairy tale? Well, if any of the book is based on fact and we know it is, then it would not be classified as a complete fairy tale.
-
Narkissos
Then Moses must have been fantastically intelligent to get the creative epochs in the correct order.
Who says Moses wrote Genesis?
Who says days are epochs?
Who says it is a "correct order" (implied, by the standards of scientific paleontology)?
If you are speaking of Genesis 1 (the order of creation being completely different in Genesis 2, man -> plants -> animals -> woman), what about the "correctness" of light before the sun, moon and stars?
What makes little sense from an anachronistic "scientific" perspective makes a lot of sense from the standpoint of literary structure: days # 1, 2 and 3 provide the frame (day/night, heaven/sea, earth/vegetation) which days # 4, 5 and 6 respectively populate (sun/moon-stars, birds/fish, earthly animals).
Are you reading the text?
-
Justitia Themis
If you are speaking of Genesis 1 (the order of creation being completely different in Genesis 2, man -> plants -> animals -> woman), what about the "correctness" of light before the sun, moon and stars?
Narkissos:
I love reading your responses; you have proven yourself to have deep understanding, and clearly, you know more about the languages than I. Perhaps you can help us all here. Genesis 1 says that God proceeded to "make" the luminaries (sun, moon, stars), not create them. The word used is waiyaas (make) versus bara (create). Any thoughts on the difference?
-
OpenFireGlass
Perhaps you can help us all here. Genesis 1 says that God proceeded to "make" the luminaries (sun, moon, stars), not create them. The word used is waiyaas (make) versus bara (create). Any thoughts on the difference?
If we wanna get nit-picky 'bout it... it also says "proceeded to make"... NOT finished...
just sayin'
-
Justitia Themis
If we wanna get nit-picky 'bout it... it also says "proceeded to make"...& NOT finished...
just sayin'
Pardon me. I didn't realize discussing languages/words/meanings was being "nit-picky."
-
under_believer
About those two creation accounts in Genesis:
- If you believe that the Bible is the Word of God, ask yourself: Why do you need the creation accounts to be literal? If they are figurative or allegorical, does that somehow threaten your faith in your God? If indeed they are entirely of human manufacture and bear no relation to the truth, does THAT somehow threaten your belief? The Bible is full of poetic language, allegory, parables. Why would anyone NEED for the creation account to be literal?
- Conversely, if you accept the overwhelming scientific consensus that life on earth did indeed evolve from bacteria, does the fact that Genesis doesn't specify this somehow threaten your belief? I cannot find the quote, but recently a Vatican official said something to the effect of: "We don't feel that science and the Bible are contradictory. Genesis is remarkably silent on the development and speciation of Galapagos finches."
-
OpenFireGlass
Pardon me. I didn't realize discussing languages/words/meanings was being "nit-picky."
sorry... forgot to ad a couple of these...
2Timothy 2:14-
Keep reminding them of these things charging them before God as witness, not to fight about words, a thing of no usefulness at all because it overturns those listening.