Is Genesis account just a myth?

by AK - Jeff 54 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  BFD

  "Call me Ishmael...."

  I won't bore you with my story. When I started this journey the first place I turned was the Bible. I had never read it before. I read the NT in reverse practiacally, starting with Revelation. After I fininshed read the Gospel I turned to Genesis. I never finished it. I'd rather read Alice In Wonderland. I think it's myth.

  I'm stuck now because if I think the the OT is myth than it would logically follow that so is the NT. I can't let go of Jesus. Tomorrow is a new day.

  BFD
• 

  Mr. Majestic

  BFD.

  This is the problem with the NT and why I had to put a question over that part of the bible also. So much of it ties into the accounts of Genesis, Jesus even quoting from the account himself, talking of the days of Noah, the first man created, even the chronology of Jesus himself at the beginning of Matthew and Luke, anyone who has a doubt about Genesis has also now got to get around the problems of the references in the NT. This will then put a question mark over the whole biblical account, if you are looking at it honestly…….
• 

  Blueblades

  MR.Majestic. Did you ever consider that Jesus quoting could actually have been misquoted. There is a book on this very subject. Misquoting Jesus, the story behind who changed the Bible and why. Bart D. Ehrman is the author. It is about how mistakes and changes shaped the Bible we read today.

  From the scribes, the scholars and Bible translators, everyone interested in the wording of the New Testament should read this book.

  Did Jesus really say what others said he said? Could he have been misquoted? I found this book to be challenging.

  Blueblades
• 

  Mr. Majestic

  I don’t know about just Jesus quotes being changed, there is a lot of evidence that quite a bit of the NT has been altered. But that is going a little bit off topic and could do with another thread to be fair to AK – Jeff.

  But just to answer, no, I have not read the book you refer to. I am reading so many books at the moment and would like to finish them (don’t seem to be able to get the time to mind). But I have seen some evidence from scholars who were looking into the grammatical changes of the bible, and they were pointing out some of the obvious errors that have crept in, and the way that these errors have changed in many places the context of the passages that were contaminated.

  But I will take a note of your reference Blueblades…..thank you……
• 

  drew sagan

  A pretty basic, but good reference on what's going on within the genesis text, it's multiple sources, and such: The Torah, A Modern Commentary Looking at the text mainly from the perspective from a modern, 21st century, scientifically educated viewpoint will take you in many directions. Rather than trying to get out of the text what we feel it should provide, it should rather be looked at from the perspective of the culture from with the story originated at what it meant to the people who read it, shared it, and revered it.
• 

  garybuss
• 

  Mulan

  In answer to your question, the answer is a resounding yes, the Genesis account is just a myth.

  DITTO
• 

  5go

  Other creation accounts are viewed as myths why should genesis account be exempted.

  There was a great skit on the Al Franken. Basically the skit went this Pat Robertson was interviewing a native american creationist who wanted creation taught in schools. The native american gives this long creation account from his tribe. Which ends in Pat basically dumb founded as to who would believe such crap. The native american then kids says that kids would rather hear their creation account than the one they have already heard ten thousands times in church.
• 

  AK - Jeff

  The diagram is interesting Gary. Thanx

  When you take the whole of Genesis, it becomes even more surreal and unbelievable to me. But I just began to dwell a bit on the matter of hydrology in the account. Although I know that tropical forestation is enhanced by a humid, misty environ, in those cases there is invariably a monsoon season that precedes, isn't there? Thus providing deep moisture to evaporate into the air.

  Side question arises from that thought though: Is there anyplace on earth that is 'hot and misty' that is not of the 'rain forest' variety, and that supports vegetation in abundance? It seems to me that without the rain first, that condition would not exist. Still there might be - does anyone know of such a place?

  Of course the Hebrew beliefs as demonstrated in the scan Gary posted would account for them not questioning the validity of the account [or for them thinking no one ever would as they invented the account in legend].

  Jeff
• 

  Caedes

  In the creation acount the firmament seperated the waters above from the sky and ground, why was that needed if there was no rain until the flood? It sounds more like an explanation used to explain the mechanism for rain.