"The Creation Story!"

The entire Bible is a compilation of myths that evolved out of the minds of primitive peoples.

"Primitive People!"
By Paul Andrew Bourne, MSc. (candidate); BSc. (Hons); Dip. Edu.


According our socialization, it appears that peoples of today's world are equally more advanced than peoples of past centuries. Despite our perception, I believe that the word "primitive" is both derogatory and negative for this discourse. Because the same primitive peoples of past centuries have created various products that modern generation rely for their existence. In addition, peoples of old did construct items that are still mysterious even to this date.

Therefore, let us critically analyse the portrayal of James' revelation of the creation story. "Is it a myth?"

Re: "Primitive People!"


Of course it's a myth. People don't pop into existence out of thin air, unless you believe in magic. Do you believe in Magic?

The one thing that makes the idea of adam and eve incomprehensible is the belief that they were the first humans. They were not. They were the first organisms. First adam, then through cytogenesis, eve came of adam. They were the first, and their sons cain and abel were the next cells, sons of the first ones. That cain killed abel is just a metaphor for how the world works. Animals eat animals.

The genesis is true, just not literal.

Phoenix wrote:


No. Why not? Because it is a long time since man was so primitive as he is today. He has built his societies to extreme civilisation, but morally he is more primitive than in a long time.

The bible is a story that is written in poetic form. It is not a sciencejournal, though the statement I quoted above seems to treat it as one.

If you search for proof, the bible is useless. If you search for direction on the other hand....

Cyracuz is on to something. Only the most literal fundamentalists believe the Bible tells it like it was, exactly. But what a rich source for seeing how human nature hasn't changed much over thousands of years!

Blew my mind when I realized that, right around the time I was cramming for my M.A. exam in English. All these themes--love, lust, hate, vengeance, jealousy, honor, vanity...They've been around for, like, forever!

Yes D'artagnan. Forever, or at least as long as humans have existed. But all these themes you mention... Seems to me that alot of them are about to be forgotten by the modern man. Honor for one. It is my belief that the way civilisation is evolving, it will lead to a degeneration of man. He has never been farther from his origins than he is today...

"The figurative - Bible"
Paul Andrew Bourne, MSc. (candidate); BSc. (Hons); Dip. Edu.


Now that we have formulated a premise on which to argue, "Why then is the 'Bible' used with the context of absolute truth"? Furthermore, the issue of first Adam and second Eve is a representation of "what"? And, finally "why was cain's wife not spoken of?" Is the answer to the latter question the myth of the myth?

Perhaps Origins are overrated. I often feel that tradition holds us back more than it benefits us.

True, but if you uproot a flower it will die. There are things we are dependant of still. I just think we should pay a little more attention to that fact. We still need nature. There is a difference between tradition and previous mistakes, although the difference is sometimes hard to spot.

When reading the OT, we must suspend our need for accuracy and accept metaphor, symbolism and good ole fashioned made-up legends.

The fundamentalist Christians have entire Biblical conferences on the problem of "pre Adamite men".Theyve got themselves caught in a bit of circular reasoning .

I suspect that at the time of the Adam & Eve story there were two or more separate breeds of Homo whatever running around.

Naturally Adam and Eve had as much right to regard themselves as "true humans" as anybody else. So when Cain went off into the woods and mated with another type of "homo whatever" the resulting crossbred became the first true "homo sapiens".

Every farmer knows the results of crossbreeding. It results in a certain superiority as to vigor, weight gain, and profitability if you are selling beef. It also results in a certain loss of predictability as to similar traits.

Since "Homo Sapiens" had at least a 2% survival advantage in a thousand years or so there were no more Homo erectus, Neanderthals, Australiapicus etc. And very few San, Pygmies, and Bushmen.

So I can understand how the "myth" may have had some basis in the observations that the earliest authors of the Bible were able to honestly and fairly deduce.

Of course it seems unlikely that Cain was the only teenager that went off into the bushes to taste forbidden fruit. :wink:

Since the developement of "breeds" is adequetly evolutionarily explained by the separation of a species and "plate tectonics" adequetly explains how such a separation of a species could reasonably come about I suspect that the aforementioned authors of Genisis were honestly trying to explain their observations.

Remember when Cain was cast out of Eden God placed a mark on him so he would be distinguished and not killed by others. Which others? The population should have been 5 - Adam, Eve, Abel (now dead), Cain and Seth.

I think the bible distinguished people from others, were the people are others that God sanctified.

There are many sites dealing with Bible inconsistencies e.g.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/absurd.shtml

e.g.

GE 1:3-5, 14-19 There was light ("night and day") before there was a sun. (Note: If there were no sun, there would be no night or day. Also, light from the newly created heavenly bodies seems to have reached the earth instantaneously though it now takes thousands or millions of years.)

GE 1:12, 16 Plants began to grow before there was sunlight.

GE 1:29 Every plant and tree which yield seed are given to us by God as good to eat. (Note: This would include poisonous plants such as hemlock, buckeye pod, nightshade, oleander.)

GE 2:15-23, 3:1-5, 1TI 2:14 Eve was created after Adam had already been given the prohibition about eating the forbidden fruit. Eve believed the serpent (the craftiest of all of God's wild creatures) when he assured her that she would become wise and would not die if she ate the fruit. Eve has been blamed for causing Adam to fall, and ultimately for the fall of mankind. (Note: Prior to eating the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve would have had no knowledge of right and wrong; they would not have known that it was a sin to disobey God or to obey the serpent. After they ate the forbidden fruit, God placed a guard around the "Tree of Eternal Life" to keep them from eating its fruit. He could have done the same for the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" before Adam and Eve disobeyed. In addition, even though the prohibition regarding the forbidden fruit was made to Adam before Eve came on the scene, Eve has been blamed for the Fall; 1TI 2:14 says: "... Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.")

GE 3:1-5 The serpent speaks human language (presumably Hebrew).

GE 3:14-16 God curses the serpent, Eve, and Adam for what they have done. (Note: This is inconsistent with God's omniscience; God should have known full well, ahead of time, what the outcome would be. Since God created the three as well as the Tree of Knowledge, he is ultimately responsible for the Fall.)

GE 3:14 The serpent eats dust for the rest of his life (by command of God).

GE 4:15 A mark is placed on Cain as a distinctive identifying symbol when there were only three (known) persons on earth.

hey g'day, Im gonna glom your "genesis inconsistancies" and use it , I was too lazy to go back and do this myself. I think that fish and land animals were created at the same time in genesis ?

One thing: Genesis is not about the making of man. It's about the making of the world, in wich man is only one creature. If other monkeys had the genesis, they would call adam and eve the first monkeys. They were the first organizms. Thats all.

Interestingly, this inconsistancy goes away if we assume that this part of the story is an allegory describing the rise of consciousness in Homo Sapiens.

Homo Sapiens probably had no choice about "eating" the fruit of knowledge of good and evil; it was inevitible given the evolutionary path we were on. But once we gained that knowledge, in a sense, eternal life was denied to us because we became aware of our mortality along with our newly found knowledge. Non-aware animals don't know of their own mortality, and so we might say that they have immortality.

That is the way I understand it also rosborne. But I am also aware that this knowledge has come to me after a sincere attempt to understand what was actually meant by what is said in the genesis. The common approach is to dismiss it on the basis that it doesn't fit with modern science. What is forgotten is that the lingo used is thousands of years old. It is not an accurate detailed description. It requires more of the reader than most other writings found today. When you find a paradox or a contradiction it is because you are looking for it. Treat einsteins writings about relativity the same as the genesis, and you are bound to find contradictions.

Those who take the story literally are really missing out. They are not giving credit to the people of those times for actually understanding the nature of humanity as a creature of nature. I think the people who wrote that story understood that we had come from an "animal" state, and were telling us about that amazing transition where we first gained our awareness.

Skeptics have used Cain's wife time and again to try to discredit the book of Genesis as a true historical record. Many of them have also claimed that, for Cain to find a wife, there must have been other "races" of people on the earth who were not descendants of Adam and Eve.

"Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned" (Rom. 5:12)

We read in 1 Corinthians 15:45 that Adam was "the first man." God did not start by making a whole group of men.

The Bible makes it clear that only the descendants of Adam can be saved. Romans 5 teaches that we sin because Adam sinned. The death penalty, which Adam received as judgement for his sin of rebellion, also passed on to all his descendants.

Since Adam was the head of the human race when he "fell," we who were in the loins of Adam "fell" also. Thus, we are all separated from God. The final consequence of sin would be separation from God in our sinful state forever. Of course this is where salavation through Jesus comes in, and all that good jazz.

There was only one man at the beginning-- made from the dust of the earth (Gen. 2:7). This means that Cain's wife was a descendant of Adam. She could not have come from another "race" of people and must be one of Adam's descendants.

Cain was the first child of Adam and Eve recorded in Scripture (Gen. 4:1). He and his brothers, Abel (Gen. 4:2) and Seth (Gen. 4:25) were part of the first generation of children ever born on this earth. Even though only these three males are mentioned by name, Adam and Eve had other children. In Genesis 5:4 a statement sums up the life of Adam and Eve-- "And the days of Adam after he had fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters." This does not say when they were born. Many could have been born in the 130 years (Gen. 5:3) before Seth was born.

During their lives, Adam and Eve had a number of male and female children. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote that "The number of Adam's children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters." The Bible does not tell us how many children were born to Adam and Eve. However, considering their long life spans (Adam lived for 930 years-- Gen. 5:5), it would seem reasonable to suggest there were many. Remember that they were commanded to "Be fruitful, and multiply" in Genesis 1:28.

If we now work totally from Scripture, without any personal prejudices or other extra-biblical ideas, then back at the beginning, when there was only the first generation, brothers would have had to have married sisters or there would have been no more generations. We are not told when Cain married or any of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that some brothers had to marry their sisters at the beginning of human history.

Many people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human. A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve-- all are of "one blood." The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Lev. 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Gen. 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other.

Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Gen. 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. Like I said, it was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriage.

Today brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes, there being some 130,000 pairs that specify how a person is put together and functions. Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways. For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the other-- or perhaps someone's nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone's jaw is a little out of shape-- and so on. Let's face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so.

The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will each have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair. The good gene in a pair tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones. (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate over generation after generation.)

However, the more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, since these have been inherited by the same parents. Therefore, a brother and a sister are likely to have similar mistakes in their genes. A child of a union between such siblings could inherit the same bad gene on the same gene pair from both, resulting in two bad copies of the gene and serious defects.

However, Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes. When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was "very good" (Gen. 1:31), so their genes were perfect-- no mistakes. But, when sin entered the world (because of Adam-- Gen. 3:6, Rom. 5:12), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate (that is, suffer death and decay-- Rom. 8:22). Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.

Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam and Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate). In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God's approval, without any potential to produce deforming offspring.

By the time of Moses (a few thousand years later), degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close-relative) marriage (Lev. 18-20). By this time, though, there were plenty of people on the earth, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.



First of all, in the days before civil government was instituted to punish murderers (Gen. 9:6), someone would want to harm Cain for killing Abel if they were closely related to Abel! Strangers could hardly have cared. So the people Cain was afraid of could not have been another race of people.

Secondly, Cain and Abel were born quite some time before Abel's death. Genesis 4:3 states: "And in the course of time it came to pass that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord."

Note the phrase "in the course of time". We know Seth was born when Adam was 130 years old (Gen. 5:3), and Eve saw him as a "replacement" for Abel (Gen. 4:25). Therefore, the period from Cain's birth to Abel's death may have been 100 years or more-- allowing plenty of time for other children of Adam and Eve to marry and have children and grandchildren. By the time Abel was killed, there could well have been a considerable number of descendants of Adam and Eve, involving several generations.