Genesis interpretations - how many are there?

[robvalue]

Really? Wow. Well let's say I have one too, and he's wrong. How would we settle this, I wonder?

[The Grand Nudger]

By slaughtering all the men and women in his village, and taking those young girls who;ve never known a man for yourself...I believe is the traditional, divinely sanctioned, resolution protocol.

[robvalue]

Oh okay, sounds reasonable. First one to 500 wins then!

[vorlon13]

By slaughtering all the men and women in his village, and taking those young girls who;ve never known a man for yourself...I believe is the traditional, divinely sanctioned, resolution protocol.

Could I pick one of the men folk to save ??

[Angrboda]

Seriously Drich, my personal reputation is not in any danger. Neither, sadly to say, is yours.

But thank you for your concern.

[Godscreated]

Atheists, not believers, are ultimately responsible for the multiple interpretations of Genesis:  Every time we have the temerity, the unholy gall, to point out inconsistencies and logical/factual errors in their creation myth, they trot out a new version in a more and more desperate attempt to salvage whatever remains of their clumsy faery story.

In short, there are exactly as many Genesis interpretations as there are fatal errors in Genesis.

Boru

 No atheist has pointed out any errors in the scriptures, period. 

GC

[Pat Mustard]

Really, can someone tell me how many different interpretations of Genesis are there? Christians clobber us non-stop for not taking Book Of Genesis for granted but which interpretation? They themselves can't agree on what is the right interpretation. These are that I know:

-Flat Earthers: They take book of Genesis really literally and think that you are going to Hell if you don't consider Earth to be flat and center of the universe because spherical Earth that revolves around the Sun corrodes morality making humans "insignificant beings on an insignificant planet."

-Young Earth Creationists: They actually are really similar to FEs they just don't take parts about Earth being flat seriously, but they believe if you accept evolution and non-six day creation that you are immoral because you consider human to be "just an animal". Curiously they think FEs are crazy.

-"Evolutionists": These apparently see biological evolution described in the Genesis book. They seem insecure in their views, sometimes they'll defend YACs and they have relatives that are YACs, but hey at least they're trying.

-Old Earth Creationists: To be honest I find this branch to be maybe the strangest. They believe that god of the Bible created universe in six days but billions of years ago, not 6000 as YACs do. And they have a movement about them that is perhaps mix of people who are YACs and "Evolutionists". Like, I remember watching a nutty "documentary" called "Mystery of the Sphinx" with Charlton Heston where he presents that worldview and as you can imagine their evidence is Atlantis, Edgar Cayce, face on Mars and so on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbUsGnMUH2Y

(EDIT documentary is actually "Mysterious Origins of Man" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQU9AhPnwsk )

There are some other interpretations (probably thousands of them) like some guy that debated AronRa claims YACs are wrong because god didn't create world in 6 days but 6000 years and some other stuff.

To answer your question, how many christians are there?

[Godscreated]

 And because the bible states explicitly that Adam lived 930 years, it's not true that we can't put bounds on the length of time Adam lived in the garden.

Adam would have lived for an eternally if he had not sinned, His time began when he sinned and not before.

GC

---

It's worth noting that Genesis 2 has man being created outside the Garden of Eden, so there's no need to separate the two narratives.

Agree.

As to the exit point, nothing in Genesis fixes the time when Adam and Eve left the garden, so the events detailed after Genesis 2:5 could all have occurred on the sixth day, as stated in Genesis 1.  You need an end point to your timeline.  (In addition to other assumptions, such as completeness, genre, and so on.)

The temptation and Adam and Eve falling to it could not have happened until at least day eight. God said that all was good in day seven. Day eight is not realistic just possible because we know God walked in the Garden with them in the evening, He would not have done that on the day of rest, so day eight is the logical time line for that to happen and the serpent wasn't going to stick his nose out in the presence of God. So from day nine on seems to be more reasonable for the temptation, punishment and exodus from the Garden. The end point is the exodus of the Garden, everything before that was bound in an eternal existence.

GC

---

The fact that not even all Christians can even agree on whether the first story is literal or not shows you just how bad a job God did communicating. You'd think he could at least come and clear that bit up, to get them started.

Funnily enough, atheists seem to pretty much all agree on what happened there.

Atheist can't have but one belief as to what happen because they do not believe any of it happened. On the other hand most Christians except the creation and do interpret it differently because some do not take it literally. The story is a literal story and Chapter one and two do not contradict. Chapter one gives the creation as chronological and Chapter two is giving details in no real order because the order was established in Chapter one. Before the advent of evolution there were no maybe this and maybe that, everyone took the Genesis story as literal, the ensuing arguments mislead the weaker Christians because they were weak in their understanding of science. YEC Christians like myself do not have all the answers, however we see the many flaws in evolution because we take the time to study, we do not sit around on our hands we look for the evidence that will lead to truth.

GC

[The Valkyrie]

Atheists, not believers, are ultimately responsible for the multiple interpretations of Genesis:  Every time we have the temerity, the unholy gall, to point out inconsistencies and logical/factual errors in their creation myth, they trot out a new version in a more and more desperate attempt to salvage whatever remains of their clumsy faery story.

In short, there are exactly as many Genesis interpretations as there are fatal errors in Genesis.

Boru

 No atheist has pointed out any errors in the scriptures, period. 

GC

Surely, you mean APART from all the contradictions , errors and faults that have been pointed out both here and online numerous times?

Those same contradictions, etrors, and faults that have pretty much lead to a whole industry called "apologetics" to make excuses for them?

[Fake Messiah]

why not read it yourself and make up your own mind?

Yes I did and that's why I concluded it was bullshit. Not just that but Bible is supposed to be this profound book and yet it contains the same old story of magician creating the world - there is nothing profound about it. There were lots of stories like that already, like Prometheus creating man from clay, so what makes this one "true"? - Because it claims to be so.

But if someone was to approach all these interpretations and think which one to choose he could say that "Old Earth Creationists" are wrong because they also mix in Vedic mythology in it, but then "Evolutionist-creationists" mix outsider books in their interpretation of Genesis which are science books and even Young Earth Creationists mix science with the Bible because science (study of nature) tells us that world is round and is circling around the Sun. So the only ones who are completely true to the Bible are Flat Earthers.

what is the base elemental make up for "dust" carbon... what are we made of?? carbon

If dust was made of carbon we would all be dead by now from black lung disease.