The Literal Meaning of Genesis

[Douglas Summers]

I think you have it backwards. Perhaps you aren't familiar with Romans 1:20:
Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

You should understand that Hammurabi already knew, as all men do, natural law given by God, and acted on that. You're thinking that God copied from Hammurabi, when it was the other way around.

Read St. Paul's letter to the Romans and see if you don't change your mind.

Good Post!

 

[Randy]

I think you have it backwards. Perhaps you aren't familiar with Romans 1:20:
Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

You should understand that Hammurabi already knew, as all men do, natural law given by God, and acted on that. You're thinking that God copied from Hammurabi, when it was the other way around.

Read St. Paul's letter to the Romans and see if you don't change your mind.

My point is that it was from the law that GOD gave to Moses. It has nothing to do with Hammurabi. So now you state God copied his copy?

And again Jesus's point is from a personal view. Do not return evil for evil. Which is different from Governing authorities in regard to a judicial system.
Randy

 

[Barbarian]

The Mosaic law is Spiritual (Rom. 7:14). Holy , righteous and good (Rom. 7:12). The Hammurabi was a carnal law. The Hammurabi law was written to make one self righteous in the sight of men. The Mosaic law was to condemn sin in sinful man and send them to the Lord and they became righteous before God.

It wasn't "The Hammurabi." Hammurabi was a king who codified law for all persons in his empire. He merely considered natural law, which is give to all men by God, and recognized it in his laws.

Romans 2:13 For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves:

 

[Barbarian]

My point is that it was from the law that GOD gave to Moses.

Moses lived several hundred years after Hammurabi died. As you just learned, Hammurabi also got his code from God, but not through Moses. Rather it was by the natural law that God gives to all men, who know fundamental right and wrong.

I don't know why you would think that God copied his copy.

And again Jesus's point is from a personal view. Do not return evil for evil.

I don't see Him making that exception in any of His teachings.

Which is different from Governing authorities in regard to a judicial system.
Randy

The world is indeed different than the Kingdom of God. You must pick one of them. Choose wisely.

 

[calvin]

On the science forum, someone expressed interest in looking at the ancient Christian thinking on the creation story in Genesis.

I suggested a review of the thinking of the most influential ancient Christian theologian might be a good start. St. Augustine of Hippo is highly regarded in all three major branches of Christianity. His work, The Literal Meaning of Genesis, is the single most influential study of Genesis in the Christian Church.

Hopefully, we can respectfully talk about Augustine's ideas (which are not all considered settled viewpoints by most Christians) and how they affected our understanding of God and creation.

There are two major issues of concern for modern Christians:

• Augustine, after trying for years to interpret the Creation story in Genesis as a literal history, finally concluded that it was not a literal timetable or sequence, but rather that the Genesis week was a literary structure used by God to explain the meaning of creation.
• Augustine held that creation itself was authoritative, and that reason and experience would never contradict scripture. He had no use for people who denied reason and evidence in understanding scripture. And he cautioned his fellow Christians to be ready to change their opinions if new evidence showed the old ideas to be wrong.

I'll have some observations by the end of the week.

calvin here,
To my way of thinking being told everything happened in a 6 day period when it might for example have taken 6 years is not going to be all that helpful.
All I need to know (being a dumbo Neanderthal) is that the Lord God created everything. There was no need to say 6 days if it were not so.
Do I need to know the details?
Would I even care?
Would it even occur to my primitive brain that there was a sequence of creative events?
Jesus referred to the first marriage, Okay so all I need to know is that there was this couple who were the first people.
All I need to know is that they messed up and were kicked out of Eden etc.
All the other stuff if not truth would just be non germane baggage.
So I figure that contrary to Genesis being 'a literary structure used by God to explain the meaning of creation', it was an 'eye witness' account so to speak of an actuality.

 

[Douglas Summers]

It wasn't "The Hammurabi." Hammurabi was a king who codified law for all persons in his empire. He merely considered natural law, which is give to all men by God, and recognized it in his laws.

Romans 2:13 For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves:

Yes, I agree.

 

[Barbarian]

calvin here,
To my way of thinking being told everything happened in a 6 day period when it might for example have taken 6 years is not going to be all that helpful.
All I need to know (being a dumbo Neanderthal) is that the Lord God created everything. There was no need to say 6 days if it were not so.
Do I need to know the details?
Would I even care?

And we have a winner.

Whether you take Genesis as the early Christians did in a figurative sense, or if you take a more modern approach, it doesn't matter, so long as you get the message. And you clearly have that.

 

[Randy]

Moses lived several hundred years after Hammurabi died. As you just learned, Hammurabi also got his code from God, but not through Moses. Rather it was by the natural law that God gives to all men, who know fundamental right and wrong.

I don't know why you would think that God copied his copy.



I don't see Him making that exception in any of His teachings.



The world is indeed different than the Kingdom of God. You must pick one of them. Choose wisely.

God is the source of all things. He established Government. Otherwise we would have lawlessness. Gods enemies are always in abundance. As is written laws are written for lawbreakers.
I Timothy
"We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,"

Apparently I am having difficulties with "your" message. As I keep pointing out the law was given to Moses from God who predates the world. It has nothing to do with obtaining anything from "Hammurabi" quotes or otherwise even if Hammurabi used like punishments.

You should see a difference between personal revenge which is what Jesus spoke against and a government judicial system.
Example:Is the death penalty lawful in Gods eyes for one convicted of capital murder on the testimony of two or more witness? Yes
Is the death penalty mandatory for our government -No :If its offensive to any such people can speak to their legislators.

Personal -Forgive others as God forgives you.
Jesus method
“If your brother or sister sins, (or sins against you) go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

 

[Douglas Summers]

It wasn't "The Hammurabi." Hammurabi was a king who codified law for all persons in his empire. He merely considered natural law, which is give to all men by God, and recognized it in his laws.

Romans 2:13 For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves:

In Exodus 18:17-27), Moses's father-in-law Jethro gives Moses advice on governing Israel and it's masses. In Deuteronomy 1:8-18, The Lord gives Moses similar advice, making our point.

 

[Jim Parker]

That is one reason why when it comes to matters of faith, I am 'Bible Alone'
I can't have faith in a mere man's understanding no matter how many Phds he has.

Unfortunately, the position you espouse is impossible.
Your (or my, or anyone's) position is never "Bible Alone"; it is your (my, our) own, personal "mere man's understanding" of the scriptures, PhD to GED. We are all influenced by a multitude of factors which shape and color our understanding.

It is of equal folly to avow that you're understanding is correct because you are led by the Holy Spirit into all truth because that requires that you have a unique ability to hear the Holy Spirit that anyone who has a different view does not.

We, as individuals are not the infallible bastions of the Truth. That is reserved for "the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." 1Ti 3:15

iakov the fool

 

[Barbarian]

God is the source of all things. He established Government.

More than that, as you learned, God made natural law known to all men, so that they do understand good and evil and are, as St. Paul says, without excuse. What I'm concerned about is your suggestion that God borrowed His law from Hammurabi. As I showed you, it's the other way around.

Apparently I am having difficulties with "your" message.

Try Romans 1:20. St. Paul does a much better job of explaining it that I do.

 

[Barbarian]

In Exodus 18:17-27), Moses's father-in-law Jethro gives Moses advice on governing Israel and it's masses. In Deuteronomy 1:8-18, The Lord gives Moses similar advice, making our point.

It's a good point. But it's also true that God has given His law to all men, and they cannot plead ignorance of natural law.

 

[jasonc]

It's a good point. But it's also true that God has given His law to all men, and they cannot plead ignorance of natural law.

The torah by Moses is a bit above hammurabi
The later won't lead to repent and has no.means of atonement.

 

[Barbarian]

he torah by Moses is a bit above hammurabi
The later won't lead to repent and has no.means of atonement.

It is natural law, a basic sense of right and wrong understood by all men. It is by no means all that a believer would be called on to follow.

 

[calvin]

Hello calvin here.
Jim Parker wrote:

We, as individuals are not the infallible bastions of the Truth. That is reserved for "the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." 1Ti 3:15

Thank you for making my point so well
You did not quote Scripture in context so.
Let us look at Paul's advice to young Timmy in a bit of context shall we?
1Ti 3:14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: Kjv
What things is it he,Paul wrote? Ahh must be the pastoral advice that preceded and what was Paul's motive for what had passed?
but read on to verse 15, "you're a smart man Dr. Floyd you will know what to do".
And of course, the very writings that you suggest are of value here come from where exactly?
Yes...yes.....the Bible, not the interpretations by such as Augustine or iakov the fool.
Yes indeedy the Bible contains inspired words from God and we are truly blessed if we are guided by them.

 

[calvin]

It is natural law, a basic sense of right and wrong understood by all men. It is by no means all that a believer would be called on to follow.

And what exactly is your understanding of what extra a man is called on to follow?

 

[Jim Parker]

And of course, the very writings that you suggest are of value here come from where exactly?
Yes...yes.....the Bible, not the interpretations by such as Augustine or iakov the fool.

Or yours.

 

[calvin]

Or yours.

Yes or mine, I agree with you 100% on that. Again you make my point so well.

 

[calvin]

Or yours.

So Jim here is the point, I understand a certain Bible passage to mean something, I share that understanding via this forum and all including yourself can evaluate it by your own understanding and either agree or share your own understanding. But the minute you interpose the thinking of others, has not your thinking been shaped by an extra Biblical source, one that you have not any evidence of endorsement of, from the Holy Spirit?
Is the Bible actually that outdated and/or that incomplete?

 

[Jim Parker]

So Jim here is the point, I understand a certain Bible passage to mean something, I share that understanding via this forum and all including yourself can evaluate it by your own understanding and either agree or share your own understanding. But the minute you interpose the thinking of others, has not your thinking been shaped by an extra Biblical source, one that you have not any evidence of endorsement of, from the Holy Spirit?
Is the Bible actually that outdated and/or that incomplete?

The best interpreters of the Bible are the early church fathers.
They're the ones who gave us Trinity, nature of Christ, deity of the Holy Spirit and the canon of scripture.
They maintained the apostolic teaching.
Now it's a free-for-all.