responding to common objections to bible part 7

[total relism]

Sorry?

The Bible the only book of Prophecy?

What about all the prophecies that didn't make it into the Bible?

The Bible doesn't even MENTION the destruction of Troy!

Look - I'm a Christian - but you're just talking out of the your fundament-alist.

I am sorry but i am not sure what your saying so i will respond to what i think your arguing, that the bible is not the only religious book of Prophecy, and it does not Prophecy because it does not mention the fall of troy.


could you name another book with Prophecy,clear fulfilled Prophecy? a religious book claiming to be gods word? specific Prophecy like the bible has?


troy? why must it? if it was only a book of Prophecy and mentioned everything in future, than you could ask this. But it is gods word to us on salvation with Prophecy in it. Having it not mention one thing [it does not about of allot of things to come] does not take away from what it does.

I see you are unable to interpret Indian poetry.

I am not surprised.

than by all means please interpret it to say just what id does not say. I feel like im talking with Muslims about the Koran here. Please show me how to inteprit it so it says what is not here [absolute origin of space/time/matter/energy] and does not say the gods were created after and there was already matter and energy and gods created after.

It really does beg the question to why Genesis does not come with an introduction like all other books in the Bible. You incorrectly states that because there are no header verses in the other 65 books genesis 1 doesn't need one either.
Most books do have a header verse such as: "and God spake to Moses using these words:" (paraphrasing) or The words of Jeremiah, or the vision of Isiah. Why shouldn't Genesis have one? It really needs something like: The words that God spake unto Moses concerning the creation of heaven and earth.

If you have a look at the Hebrew bible, you'll notice that "heaven" used in verse 1 is the same as used later in verse 8 (Šāmáyim), which should indicate that genesis chapter 1 concerns the creation of our world with its dry land and the air (water) that surrounds it.
The narrative explains the creation as viewed from the perspective of being on or close to the earth. It is a far stretch to attribute heaven in verse 1 to be meaning the entire universe. It is something that is wrongly inferred and I am aware that has been the tradition for many years in Christianity. Simply let it go - and the big bang controversy becomes a non issue with Christians.
Genesis talks about the creation of the earth and its immediate surrounding - from the ignition of our star (1:3) to the clearance of the dense dust cloud that surrounds it (1:14-18).

Just saying to claim its a header verse would go against the bible more than constant with.


you said

" It really needs something like"

but it does not, the other books of moses start that way, not genesis. I think genesis was edited by Moses but was around before him, the focus is not moses but creation of time/space/matter in genisis 1.


you said

" Simply let it go - and the big bang controversy becomes a non issue with Christians. "


I will have to stop here, as i see your a old earth/evolutionist christian. I do not wish to show what i think that your reitpriting the bible to match a unbiblical idea [big bang millions of years etc] i dont wish to argue this point as i think it may effect your faith [not my goal]. I think a clear Reading of genesis 1 will be constant with what i said.



But as to my op, would you say that genesis does not tell the origin of time/ space/matter? even if we assume Genesis 1 only speaks of earth as you say? only this would conflict with my op.