Genesis

[Circle_Master]

Circle,

In regrads to Genesis, or Jonah and the Wale, I've heard very committed arguments for literal and figurative understandings. I've seen people come to blows practically. (I swear, I wasn't going to hit them very hard!).

Then have somebody in the group say, "Hey! Why did God bother to create the World?" The attitude changes. The reasons Why are at the root of what many people understand as How. An extreme Literal Fundamentalist and a philisophical Catholic will start using examples of How to explain the same Why. (Because God wanted to, could, and did.)

'Tis a beautiful thing.

But when you undermine people's understanding of How, we feel that you are also undermining our logic for Why, which we are much more committed to and so won't back off a millimeter.

I think the why part is easy - to glorify Himself.

We all hopefully agree on that much at least

I wouldn't mind jumping in on a 'is Jonah real?' debate. It's hard to argue when in Kings it talks about him as a court prophet. Genesis - yes, tough to do. I used to think everyone who disagreed with literal 6 day creation was being influenced by culture and science. Now, today, I don't agree with literal 6 day creation or day age or really any of them. I think it deals more with.. the why part I suppose. Why is our universe how it is? Because God is glorifying Himself. Why did God take part in all of creation? Because God was creating a magnificent world for us to see. Yeah how and why can be related sometimes, and probably here, but it is just the process of figuring out how God glorified Himself.

not sure if I am too off topic by what you said. but it compliments the previous arguments I think.

[jasJis]

I am not comfortable with 'to glorify Himself' as a reason why. Because He loves us, would be the specific reason why. To glorify Himself would be a consequence of His Love and Glory. In creating Exisitence, He glorifies Himself, but that wasn't why.

See what I mean?

[jasJis]

See how great things happen when Brothers speak in love?

I went to the Catechism for aid in explaining my understanding to you, Circle. When I read your post, 'to glorify Himself' seemed like it was fulfilling a need of God's which I could not agree with. That fact that creation brings Glory to God I agreed with you on.

Hmm. Don't want to agree with a prot carelessly , so I went to the Catechism section on Creation so I could reference Scripture, etc. I've been illuminated. Here is what I found:

III. "The World Was Created for the Glory of God"

293

Scripture and Tradition never cease to teach and celebrate this fundamental truth: "The world was made for the glory of God."134 St. Bonaventure explains that God created all things "not to increase his glory, but to show it forth and to communicate it,"135 for God has no other reason for creating than his love and goodness: "Creatures came into existence when the key of love opened his hand."136 The First Vatican Council explains:

This one, true God, of his own goodness and "almighty power," not for increasing his own beatitude, nor for attaining his perfection, but in order to manifest this perfection through the benefits which he bestows on creatures, with absolute freedom of counsel "and from the beginning of time, made out of nothing both orders of creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal. . . ."137

294

The glory of God consists in the realization of this manifestation and communication of his goodness, for which the world was created. God made us "to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace,"138 for "the glory of God is man fully alive; moreover man's life is the vision of God: if God's revelation through creation has already obtained life for all the beings that dwell on earth, how much more will the Word's manifestation of the Father obtain life for those who see God."139 The ultimate purpose of creation is that God "who is the creator of all things may at last become ‘all in all,' thus simultaneously assuring his own glory and our beatitude."140

IV. The Mystery of Creation

God creates by wisdom and love

295

We believe that God created the world according to his wisdom.141 It is not the product of any necessity whatever, nor of blind fate or chance. We believe that it proceeds from God's free will; he wanted to make his creatures share in his being, wisdom, and goodness: "For you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created."142 Therefore the Psalmist exclaims: "O LORD, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all"; and "The LORD is good to all, and his compassion is over all that he has made."143

footnotes:

138 Eph 1:5-6; 140 1Cor 15:28; 141 Wis 9:9; 142 Rev 4:11; 143 Ps 104:24 & 145:9.

Easy for you, not for me.

God created the world as a manifestation of His Glory because He is All Glory, but not out of a need for Glory. God is Glory because of His Love. We are a manifestation of His Glory and Love.

Edited January 6, 2004 by jasJis

[Circle_Master]

yes, however. do a search for every occurance of "glorify" in the Bible and look at how many times God does something only to glorify Himself. I would half to think love is an offshoot of that.

Actually

Because He loves us - He seeks to glorify Himself. He is the best thing there is, therefore His love causes Him to want to glorify Himself - so we can see it, and so we can take joy in His greatness. The Westerminster Confession captures this well enough I believe.

What is the chief end of man?

To Glorify God and enjoy Him forever.

[TABBY]

Hey guys!

I have heard many that have said, we should not take Genesis literally rather take it metaphorically. And of course I have heard others(especially among our Evangelical brothers and sisters) that what is written in Genesis should be taken literally.

I would love to hear and discuss the opinions of everyone on this board, especially on areas concerning: 1)Adam & Eve(real people?) 2)The fruit(is a real fruit or a representation of sin?) 3)The Flood(Did it happened?) and of course 4)6 Days of creation?(or was it just a representation?)

Ready! Get set... GO!

There is many answers....to this question(s)....

There are alot of theories....some really believe it happened just like that...and they also believe that the world was created in 6 days...literally.

There has been studies where they THINK they found the ark...but does that mean Adam and Even really surffaced...the earth?

There is schlars that says Exodus came BEFORE Gen....it was to answer the people's questions "Who are we, and where did we come from?"....and Gen is the answer to Ex.

There is also known the second chapter of genuis is older than the first.

It gets complicated in trying to explain all that....

There is a book called "who wrote the bible", and it gets into detail on that...

I myself have not really thought of it much......if it really happened or not....that is really not that important to me as much as What Christ has done for us....I guess what I am saying IS.....I spend more time in what Christ did than what happened or what didnt happened....

[Circle_Master]

There is also known the second chapter of genuis is older than the first.

What is this based on? I would be interested to look at it. Genesis 1 is of an interest to me.

[jasJis]

Actually

Because He loves us - He seeks to glorify Himself. He is the best thing there is, therefore His love causes Him to want to glorify Himself - so we can see it, and so we can take joy in His greatness. The Westerminster Confession captures this well enough I believe.

What is the chief end of man?

To Glorify God and enjoy Him forever.

Baltimore Catechism:

6. Q. Why did God make you?

A. God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next.

:clap:

[Circle_Master]

isn't that scary - we agree on something :P

[jasJis]

It's not scary, I was expecting it....

eventually.

::

[Norseman82]

Isn't it possible that God just spoke to the ancients in terms and images that they could understand? Much like we speak to children differently than adults?

[Circle_Master]

Isn't it possible that God just spoke to the ancients in terms and images that they could understand? Much like we speak to children differently than adults?

perhaps. If you look at Genesis 1 it is set up much like it was orally told. Repeated words "there was evening and there was morning". Even the structure

Day 1 Heavens/Earth Day 4 Sun/Moon

Day 2 Water/Sky Day 5 Fish!

Day 3 Earth/Water Day 6 Animals!

It also has 'tohu va bohu'. In the beginning the earth was "tohu va bohu". Can be many translations but the basic idea is "unformed and unfilled". The first 3 days are forming, the next 3 filling.

If you notice, Genesis is also structured around 'toledot' in Hebrew. Or 'This is the account of'. The very first one starts as well in Genesis 2:4 - so what is before it is not considered an account, it may have been added, or placed on from something else.

The images presented are terms which everyone would understand. God is sovereign and God is bigger than our universe. Fitting for the beggining of our Scriptures I would think and for the Israelites who were about to enter Canaan.

[Norseman82]

Actually, the reason I bring this up is that Genesis talks about a "dome" or "firmament" that separates the earth from the waters in the sky. If this were not simply God speaking in terms of the ancient mind, I would have thought that NASA would have run into the dome on one of its missions by now.

[Circle_Master]

Actually, the reason I bring this up is that Genesis talks about a "dome" or "firmament" that separates the earth from the waters in the sky. If this were not simply God speaking in terms of the ancient mind, I would have thought that NASA would have run into the dome on one of its missions by now.

It was a seperation of water norse. And it was part of what crashed down when the flood hit. The 'dome' of water people have made projections - and it would have blocked out UV rays and other stuff making it possible for man to live hundreds of years.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Found a good article about the Catholic Church and evolution/Genesis:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/HUMANITY/EVOLUTN.TXT

The Church has maintained that the first three chapters of Genesis contain historical truth.  Their inspired author used a popular literary form of

his day to explain certain historical facts of Creation.  These were named

specifically by the Pontifical Biblical Commission, with the approval of

Pope Pius X in 1909.  The official document states that the literal

historical meaning of the first three chapters of Genesis could not be

doubted in regard to:

  "the creation of all things by God at the beginning of time; the   

special creation of man; the formation of the first woman from the   

first man; the unity of the human race; the original happiness of    our

first parents in the state of justice, integrity, and immortality;    the

command given by God to man to test his obedience; the transgression    of

the divine command at the instigation of the devil under the form of    a

serpent; the degradation of our first parents from that primeval state   

of innocence; and the promise of a future redeemer."

The bottom line:

So, from the Catholic point of view, the scientific questions of  evolution

are largely left open to debate.  Evolutionary hypotheses which  attempt to

explain the development of living things may be accepted  except where they

conflict with these few explicit truths.

[jasJis]

Isn't it possible that God just spoke to the ancients in terms and images that they could understand? Much like we speak to children differently than adults?

Off topic, but...

Sacraments are a way God speaks and gives grace in a way that we are more likely to understand (but not completely).

[cmotherofpirl]

Actually, the reason I bring this up is that Genesis talks about a "dome" or "firmament" that separates the earth from the waters in the sky. If this were not simply God speaking in terms of the ancient mind, I would have thought that NASA would have run into the dome on one of its missions by now.

THe firmament of waters is way the hebrews described the part of the sky where the rain came from.

Genesis can be divided into 2 parts: prehistory, and history. The teaching stories are a prehistory prologue telling us God made the universe and then this world and us in particular. History starts with Abraham.

The entire book of Genesis can actually be looked on as a prologue to the most important event in the OT: the Exodus.

[TABBY]

What is this based on?  I would be interested to look at it.  Genesis 1 is of an interest to me.

Some schlars have different theories...and this is one of them

I took an Old testament theology class and I learned it there...and a book called "who wrote the bible" exaplains this....

Edited January 7, 2004 by TABBY

[Circle_Master]

could you find the author or editor for me?

[cmotherofpirl]

WE were taught that as well in OT class. Its logical. People had to invent writing and alphabets before they could write. THe beginning of the OT is a collection of oral traditions they were finally written down arouind the time of the exodus.

[Circle_Master]

WE were taught that as well in OT class. Its logical. People had to invent writing and alphabets before they could  write.  THe beginning of the OT is a collection of oral traditions they were finally written down arouind the time of the exodus.

everything in genesis would be that. it is being argued that genesis 1 was added after genesis 2 though - what would indicate this.

Edited January 7, 2004 by Circle_Master