To be honest I have read Genesis before. I've always been curious about religion. I live in the South, its all around. After a while you begin to think "what are the chances that ALL of these people have it wrong, and I have it right!" So from time to time, I have delved into the spiritual pool and taken a brief lap or two.
Every once in awhile I may need to explain a term or an argument or discussion that Jamie and I have coined. Such as "surface thinker" He had me read the book "Understanding the Times" (look it up for further explanation).
The first big issue the two of us tackled was moral relativism, be it time, place, or culture.
My argument being: right or wrong is relative to these things.
His argument being: right or wrong is not relative to anything.
In reading this book I found that his argument was right, which I sooo hate. I told him, when reading that book "I felt like I was trying to sink while wearing a life vest"
"Do you understand that?" I asked.
"Not really, please explain" he responded.
I said that when I try really, really hard to understand the argument in the book against things like moral relativism, I can "see" it. However, my mind wants to float back up to the ideas I've had in my mind for years.
Hence the term "surface thinking" came into our vernacular.
He will often say to me "you are surface thinking again" many times I dispute him, lots of times I agree and rethink my argument.
Surface thinking is simply much easier. It IS a life vest.
I tell you all of that so that I can say this, I will try not to surface think through my Bible readings. What I imagine is that, in the beginning, it will be difficult to sink into it with my life vest on. What I hope is that, as I read, the life vest will slowly become non-existent.
Genesis......Great creation story. Beautifully written. Entertaining. Similar to many, many creation stories I have read before. I have always heard that Christianity borrowed many things from the Pagans, as a way to baby step people into it. I imagine this is where many of these ideas came from.
Adam, Eve, the fruit, Eden
Basically God says:
I give you all of this, everything you could want. Ignorance is bliss, is the saying that comes to mind when I think of Adam and Eve. They should have been blissfully happy living in all their nakedness, there in paradise. But they weren't, at least Eve wasn't.
...and through this story we learn "temptation is bad".
But what I don't understand is, is He saying knowledge is bad?
He didn't want them to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, because in eating from this tree, they would then know good from evil. Why didn't he want them to know the difference between good and evil? What was the benefit of having these two people as basically blind fools alone on this Earth?
And more importantly....what if they had not eaten the fruit (and they never say apple, because they sew fig leaves together to cover themselves, why don't we assume it was a fig?)
How would mankind be different without original sin?
Then we get to dear Noah.
From Noah do we learn that God makes mistakes? Did I read that correctly? He regretted making man and putting him on Earth. To correct his mistake he planned on flooding the Earth and killing every single living thing on it. Everything that is except Noah, his fam and all the animals two by two...
Don't we all know this story? No need to get into this story is there?
The thing I did not know is that Noah was and old guy, and by old I mean he was like more than 500 when he started the ark. Did men live that long then, or were birthdays counted differently? Whats up with that?
Anyway I did find a little comfort in the fact God did say he would never do that whole thing again.
From Noah I think we are to be taught to listen to your intuition, God may not speak to us as he did to Noah. But don't most of us know when God is speaking to us. If we slow down every once in a while, we can hear the whisper, or maybe we can feel the tug. What our gut is telling us may not make sense, like Jamie and I, for example, but it may be part of something bigger.
Now I have to go and spell check this thing like 3 or 4 times!
5 comments:
God created man in his image because he wanted companionship. Why? Weren't the angels enough? I don't know. I'll ask God when I see Him.
Not eating of the Tree of Knowledge was more about obedience I think, than not wanting them to have knowledge. Would God have given mankind knowledge at some point had they been obedient? I don't know.
It's true that a lot of creationism stories have similar events. Is this because Christianity/Judaism borrowed them, or is it simply because it's true? True, I think. And all primitive peoples knew it.
People did live longer. It says that at one point, God decided to limit life spans to 120 years max.
It's not so much that God made a mistake in, and of, itself. Unless you count giving us free will, and allowing us to be tempted by Satan. But then what is love when it's forced? It's meaningless. He had to give us free will so that we could choose to love Him. That's the only way love means anything.
I think it's importanat to note the Bible's reference to Adam being made from dust(the ground). Which I believe is a veiled reference that all living things and the ground are made out of the same materials, primarily Carbon and water. Of course, when Genesis was written man wouldn't have known that. Coincidence? I don't think so. But then, I'm the believer.
Before I end my first response, I want to acknowledge that I do not have all the answers, and am still trying to figure out a lot of things myself (this is why I will ask questions myself, and answer them with, I don't know.). I still question. I don't believe God expects to believe blindly, just faithfully.
Well, that's about as subdued as I've ever seen you be.
I think the idea that companionship comes up so often in these first chapters is interesting. God and Adam, Adam and Eve, Noah and his wife, his sons and their wives, the animals two by two...Nobody is alone
That's nice.
Interesting that you mention the animals two by two. Male and female. Maybe a minor dig on homosexuality. It says male and female so that their species could be continued after the flood. Mankind of course is no different. So, besides later books describing homosexuality as wrong morally, it also goes against the basic precepts of nature and the continuation of species. And I realize that some will say that it doesn't matter anymore cause artificial insemination and the like, but isn't that just trying to find a way around it? And ignoring the moral issue? Butt we can get into more of that later. Puns happen, intended or not.
nerd
.......butt wait of course it was male and female because as you said it was to repopulate. No dig on homosexuality there, I don't think.
Yes, the basic reason for sex is to have children, but if we no longer have children we still have sex. So how is that different.
LET'S JUST WAIT ON THIS ISSUE!! Why you had to bring that issue up?! Doesn't Genesis have enough to talk about!
Post a Comment