Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

@neologist,

Sorry. Server cut half the post
Will finish later

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

There are lots of reasons, just not any good reasons. There are no reasons with any scientific validity.

0 Replies

@neologist,

Quote:

If we believe Moses' writings, he was educated in Pharoah's court. Many bible scholars believe he had access to earlier writings. His Genesis account is certainly not eye witness.

What bothers me about the story of Moses is that this man wandered the Sinai desert for decades with thousands of people but we have never found a single trace of this journey. Not one fire pit, trash dump, cemetary, settlement, encampment, NOTHING.
And we are never told in who's reign this occured.
Where is the evidence that Egypt had even enslaved a large jewish population?

1 Reply

@giujohn,

From my reading, I don't believe there was a real Moses.

2 Replies

@neologist,

Quote:

If we believe Moses' writings

There is significant evidence that Genesis was written during the exile in Babylon, i.e. something like 600-800 years after the alleged Moses / exodus from Egypt. Just because it is the first book in the Bible does not mean it was written first.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

I would agree.

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Let's take the first part:

neologist wrote:
Ch 1: 1,2: The creation of the heavens and the earth takes place in an unspecified period of time. Could have been a kazillion years. Who cares? Humans can figure that out later. This time, however, is not included as one of the creative days.

Do you believe that there is anything in this quotation which provides evidence that a supernatural being created the universe?
Sorry. Thought I had answered this already.

Exactly what do you expect as proof? It was written by a common man, not a scientist. If we believe Moses' writings, he was educated in Pharoah's court. Many bible scholars believe he had access to earlier writings. His Genesis account is certainly not eye witness. It was written simply to provide the short explanation to an agrarian people. I see no problem with the shortage of detail

I asked you to provide evidence (not proof) that the account of the creation of the universe in the Bible is true. You posted only a summary of what the Bible says, but didn't as far as I can see provide evidence that it is a true account. When I asked you why you believe it counts as evidence, you gave me an unclear answer. We are now going through this thing that you claim is evidence that supports the accuracy of Genesis paragraph by paragraph. You never seem to be able to give a simple, straight answer to any question. So, I ask yet again, do you believe that this paragraph:

Ch 1: 1,2: The creation of the heavens and the earth takes place in an unspecified period of time. Could have been a kazillion years. Who cares? Humans can figure that out later. This time, however, is not included as one of the creative days.

is evidence that the Biblical creation story is true? If you say yes, we'll discuss it. If you say no, we'll move on to paragraph two. All you ever seem to do is run away from or try to obfuscate simple, direct questions.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

I'm not sure I can give you the answer you want.
The first two chapters of Genesis were written to provide early man with a basic understanding of why we are here. If you expect scientific proof, I don't know how I could provide it. I will assert, however, that it has the essential order of creation correct and that it allows sufficient time. (not 168 hours, as some would have us believe) Sufficient for early man whose major concerns were as basic as planting and harvesting.

If you find no reason to believe the story of creation, I would assert you also have no reason to doubt.

2 Replies

@neologist,

There's plenty of reason to doubt that BS, not the least of which is thta it proceeds from unsubstantiated premises. You're trotting out that old, tired BS about what you now call "early man" (less than 3000 years ago out of the more than 100,000 years of the life of homo sapien sapiens ain't exactly early) and what said "early man" could understand. That suggests that the hillbillies who wrote those fairy tales knew waht had really happened and toned it down for their augience--an hilarious and completely unsubstantiated allegation on your part. (Is that the current Watch Tower talking point?)

You're also probably way out of the ball park with that planting an harvesting BS. Monotheism is characteristically seen to develop in pastoral bands, not agricultural bands. Your hillbillies of choice there were semi-nomadic herders, they were never slaves building pyramids in Egypt, and their story is about as plausible as any of the other "making it up as we go along" cosmogonies of the ancient middle east.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

'If there was a creator, he certainly had an unusual fondness for beetles''
J S Haldane

1 Reply

@farmerman,

And, apparently, a rather unhealthy obsession with sexual reproduction.

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

I'm not sure I can give you the answer you want.
The first two chapters of Genesis were written to provide early man with a basic understanding of why we are here. If you expect scientific proof, I don't know how I could provide it. I will assert, however, that it has the essential order of creation correct and that it allows sufficient time. (not 168 hours, as some would have us believe) Sufficient for early man whose major concerns were as basic as planting and harvesting.

If you find no reason to believe the story of creation, I would assert you also have no reason to doubt.

I also have no reason to doubt that there are five aliens in a ship from Epsilon Eridani orbiting the solar system in order to make sure that we don't destroy our world, but I'd be a prize fool to believe it just because I can't disprove it.

No, I do not expect scientific proof. I have repeatedly asked you for any evidence at all that the universe was created by an intelligent, all-powerful being in more or less the way indicated in Genesis. Stop saying over and over that I want proof. I want any evidence at all to suggest that that account is true.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

I also have no reason to doubt that there are five aliens in a ship from Epsilon Eridani orbiting the solar system in order to make sure that we don't destroy our world, but I'd be a prize fool to believe it just because I can't disprove it.

No, I do not expect scientific proof. I have repeatedly asked you for any evidence at all that the universe was created by an intelligent, all-powerful being in more or less the way indicated in Genesis. Stop saying over and over that I want proof. I want any evidence at all to suggest that that account is true.

Then you have to look through the remainder of the Bible. Although it, for the most part, doesn't bear directly on creation. I believe there is sufficient evidence of veracity. If that was your question, I didn't catch on. Sorry. But, first of all, if you found anything in ch. 1 and 2 that is questionable, we should dispatch that first, don't you think?

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
I also have no reason to doubt that there are five aliens in a ship from Epsilon Eridani orbiting the solar system in order to make sure that we don't destroy our world, but I'd be a prize fool to believe it just because I can't disprove it.

No, I do not expect scientific proof. I have repeatedly asked you for any evidence at all that the universe was created by an intelligent, all-powerful being in more or less the way indicated in Genesis. Stop saying over and over that I want proof. I want any evidence at all to suggest that that account is true.
Then you have to look through the remainder of the Bible. Although it, for the most part, doesn't bear directly on creation. I believe there is sufficient evidence of veracity. If that was your question, I didn't catch on. Sorry. But, first of all, if you found anything in ch. 1 and 2 that is questionable, we should dispatch that first, don't you think?

No I don't. Stop trying to change the subject. I have asked you over and over and over to give me any evidence at all that the universe was created by an all powerful being in more or less the way indicated in Genesis, and so far, in two threads, all you've given me is that it would be improbable for the Bible to have been able to predict the fall of Babylon if not inspired by God. Is that the totality of all of your evidence that Genesis is true?

1 Reply

no . . . it's folklore

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Supposedly, there is no evidence for the presence of numerous Jews in Egypt nor is there any evidence for the original Exodus

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

The fall of Babylon was not a subject of the creation account.
What you are asking is for evidence of the Bible's accuracy.
You haven't really dealt with this thread or the Babylon prophecy, IMHO. But here's another curious fact:
Daniel 9: 24-27 deals with the prophecy of 70 weeks. It sets out the dates for the beginning of Jesus' ministry, his death, and the opening of the covenant to gentiles. Sorry I have trouble negotiating quotations on my tablet. You and, no doubt, others may go through the account, slicing and dicing as you see fit.

I can post these all day, every day, save for their becoming lost in the avalanche of posts on a2k. Also, I have been unimpressed with the scholarship shown by those who seek to discredit.

2 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

The fall of Babylon was not a subject of the creation account.
What you are asking is for evidence of the Bible's accuracy.
You haven't really dealt with this thread or the Babylon prophecy, IMHO. But here's another curious fact:
Daniel 9: 24-27 deals with the prophecy of 70 weeks. It sets out the dates for the beginning of Jesus' ministry, his death, and the opening of the covenant to gentiles. Sorry I have trouble negotiating quotations on my tablet. You and, no doubt, others may go through the account, slicing and dicing as you see fit.

I can post these all day, every day, save for their becoming lost in the avalanche of posts on a2k. Also, I have been unimpressed with the scholarship shown by those who seek to discredit.

No, I'm asking only for evidence that there is a supreme being who created the universe in more or less the way indicated in Genesis. If you don't believe that the Babylon prediction supports this, then you've given me exactly zero evidence.

You're suggesting that Daniel's predictions about Jesus's timeline support the existence of divine inspiration and, thereby, support the rest of the Bible including creation? Is that the argument you're making?

2 Replies

Jesus was solid flesh and blood and did 37 miracles to demonstrate God's power working through him, and said-
"..believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."- John 10:38

So why shouldn't we believe him?

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Jesus was solid flesh and blood and did 37 miracles to demonstrate God's power working through him, and said-
"..believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."- John 10:38

So why shouldn't we believe him?

If this account is true, we probably should believe him or consider it seriously. What is your evidence that this account is true?

0 Replies

Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know