ing that Jesus said the first few chapters of Genesis are metaphorical; I know of no documentation indicating such a thing. I'm not even claiming that they are metaphorical myself. I'm simply saying that the Bible uses a lot of metaphor and other literary device throughout; therefore, it's absurd to insist on a literal interpretation of everything. It's better to consider the text with an open mind to possibilities.
At least it's good to see that we're past the issue of how many sons and daughters Adam had. I'd say we're making progress, except that unfortunately you've simply rushed ahead to the next available roadblock: the age of Adam.
How can we even discuss this when you are intent to rush to the most absurd conclusion possible? No one ever said that there is a universal condition that every day mentioned in the Bible represents thousands of years. Many have suggested that the six days of creation represent a much longer period of time. And why not? If you recall, on the first day of creation, on which God creates light, there's not even a sun or a moon to mark the days.
From here we could go on to talk about whether or not it's possible that Adam actually lived 930 years (in which each day is a 24-hour period). But what would be the point? You've claimed that these "stupid stories" form the basis for modern religion. Well, I've given some thought to what actually forms the basis of the Christian worldview, and I'm pretty sure that the age of Adam isn't part of it.
Since you seem to know what forms the foundations of the Christian worldview, maybe we should consider the first few chapters of Genesis and see if we can deduce anything that's actually part of this foundation. Consider the general outline of the story:
1. God calls the cosmos - everything that is, including space, time, energy, and matter - into being. Physical laws are established, giving the universe an inherent order and rationality. It is all according to His purpose and plan; it is not random. He is God and is in full control. That's pretty foundational.
2. God creates man and woman in His own image. Humanity reflects God's nature - His creativity, His ability to love, to feel, to think rationally, to develop relationships, etc. By virtue of this, all humans have inherent value because they matter to God. Yet another foundational principle.
3. God gives man a mission and a purpose - to multiply, to fill the earth, to explore, discover, learn, grow, and build. He also gives them much for their enjoyment - Himself, each other, and a garden filled with good things. Yet again we learn a foundational principle - each of us fits into God's plan somehow, and He has our good in mind.
4. Man chooses to disbelieve the previous principle, instead deciding that he knows better than God and would be better off as his own god. As a result of walking away from God, a predictable thing happens - man's relationship with God is broken, the very definition of spiritual death. What's the foundational principle here? Humanity, by rejecting God and attempting to become their own gods, is responsible for the situation we find ourselves in today. Each one of us is individually responsible for our choices and the consequences thereof. Another consideration from this is that man has the will to make choices, a will that God chooses not to force. We're not robots; we are capable of genuine moral decisions.
5. God predicts redemption for humanity, and that evil will one day be defeated. The foundational principle here is that failure is not final, because God is full of love, grace, and mercy, and would rather show these than punishment. Christians believe that this redemption is through Jesus.
Of course, the story goes on after this - we observe humanity's decent into selfishness and depravity, God's response to this and attempts to restore the broken relationship, and so forth. But details such as what ages the people lived to, what sons and daughters everyone had, whether "let there be light" implies the Big Bang, and how much of the earth the flood actually covered, are hardly foundational. One can get into long and technical discussions of these matters that touch studies from many different fields; the answers, when discovered, are often very interesting and intellectually stimulating. When it comes to spiritual matters, however, these questions are scarcely relevant at all.
You see, J.A.G., you seem to believe that science somehow "replaces" faith and makes it unnecessary and obsolete. Not so. Science deals with the physical universe; the "what" and "how" of things. It's invaluable for understanding the world we live in, and for bettering our lives and satisfying our thirst for discovery. I love to study it myself.
Faith, on the other hand, deals with the spiritual - the heart and soul. Try as it may, science can never answer the "why" - why are we here? What is our purpose? Why is there suffering in the universe, and what are we to do about it? Why is real contentment so elusive, and is there something more that we were made for? These are among the questions that cause people to reach out for God, and potentially find Him.
Thank you for the discussion. There is so much more that could be said. I hope you will take some time to educate yourself. I certainly plan to, as it's an ongoing quest for me. Have a great weekend.
Yours,
Ken
Re: Religious People Maby should Not read this.
You are as bad as the people who say science is rubbish. So stop. You are not impressing anybody. And talking about petty people, how petty is it to complain about beirut even after apoligising and saying you wouldn't complain? Quite a lot. Your whining and moping annoys me.
and got out of there.
Originally Posted by Just A Girl
Bookmarks