Adam and Eve...literal or allegorical?

[nfinke]

“The Church holds that the 46 books of the OT and the 27 books of the NT are inspired by God. Inspiration means that, in some mysterious way, God is the primary author of those books; by means of His grace He worked through the minds and wills of the sacred authors, moving them to put down in writing those truths He wished to communicate to all mankind.”

This is from a summary of the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation from Vatican II. I’ll admit the dictating analogy was a little far, but all I was getting at was Moses wrote what God intended him to write.

 

[RaisedCatholic]

I am saying it doesnt matter how Moses used the word. Moses thought he was being literal. God, who essentially dictated Genesis to him, was being symbolic, and Moses was unaware of the real meaning. God is by no means always literal in His revelations to man. Sometimes He tells it straight like with Jeremiah or Elijah, sometimes He just shows them what He wants to show them, like Isaiah and John. Why would Moses use the word for day in some different manner than normal if he himself didnt know it was being used symbolically?

No offense, but you seem to be making assumptions about what Moses “thought.” But that is just YOUR assumption, which you cannot backup from the text. Sure, the Bible has different genres (history, prophecy, poetry, etc), but there is no exegetical reason to believe the primary meaning of “day” in the Creation week means anything other than a normal 24 hour day, unless you bring a preconceived opinion into the text, or if you dismiss the similar use of the same type of format in other similar verses written by the same Mosaic author elsewhere in the Torah.

If Moses hadn’t used “evening and morning,” you could make an argument he wasn’t being literal. But to say, “he ‘thought’ he was being literal, but he really didn’t know,” now you are questioning the inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture. And since Jesus cited the first marriage took place “in the beginning” - again EXACT same Greek word in the Septuagint in Genesis 1:1, then you are questioning whether Jesus “knew” the “evening and morning ‘day’” in Genesis 1 was a literal 24 hour day or not. Now, you are questioning the Omniscience of Jesus.

 

[nfinke]

unless you bring a preconceived opinion into the text

A preconceived notion…you mean like the entire body of scientific knowledge?

I have to assume God is being literal whenever He speaks or I’m questioning God’s omniscience. Alright.

You’re again arguing that the phrase “evening and morning” cannot be used figuratively. You can keep saying that, but there are still no linguistic rules saying “this list of phases must always be used literally”. Him using the exact phrase “day, evening and morning” 12 million times to mean 24 hours would not prove in the slightest that he couldn’t use it to mean something else in Genesis one. And that is your core argument.

Jesus was talking about marriage there. He wasn’t making a statement about the age of the universe. However, in the context of Genesis, “beginning” was the time in which God created heaven and Earth. That was also the time He made Adam and Eve. In no way does “beginning” imply a 6 day period. There’s no contradiction.

 

[EndTimes]

In Humani Generis by Pope Pius XII …

• It’s clear the Church considers Adam and Eve as the actual parents of all Humans…

In the Catechism of The Catholic Church… we have …

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.265

 

[Gorgias]

I’ll admit the dictating analogy was a little far, but all I was getting at was Moses wrote what God intended him to write.

LOL!

Yeah… “a little far” kinda puts a nice shine on it, but I gotcha.

 

[RaisedCatholic]

A preconceived notion…you mean like the entire body of scientific knowledge?

No, because when you bring the “entire body” of scientific knowledge, not just part of it that supports an anti-God, anti-Bible agenda (ie: atheistic “evolution”) you find the scientific method (observation, testability, repeatability) not only does not reject the Biblical account, but also does not support evolution the way it is being taught in the secular world.

I have to assume God is being literal whenever He speaks or I’m questioning God’s omniscience.

No, and I have explained this numerous times to you already. Please refer back to my previous posts.

You’re again arguing that the phrase “evening and morning” cannot be used figuratively. You can keep saying that, but there are still no linguistic rules saying “this list of phases must always be used literally”.

Then show me ONE example from Scripture - either from the Old or New Testament - where any Biblical writer uses “evening & morning” to mean anything other than a literal 24 hour period. If you cannot, then you are imputing your personal opinion, which is not how you exegete a Scriptural passage. At least I am being consistent.

Jesus was talking about marriage there. He wasn’t making a statement about the age of the universe. However, in the context of Genesis, “beginning” was the time in which God created heaven and Earth.

Yes, and in Genesis 1:1 is where “in the beginning” is used to describe the creation of the earth & the rest of the universe, and Genesis 1:27 in this same Creation week is when God also created Adam & Eve and the first marriage in Genesis 2:24:

That was also the time He made Adam and Eve. In no way does “beginning” imply a 6 day period.

"And Jesus answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning [Greek: archē] MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” (Matthew 19:4-6)

“In the beginning [Greek: archē] God created the heavens and the earth…God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them…For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” (Genesis 1:1,27; 2:24)

Jesus is not just talking about marriage, but also when marriage took place - “in the beginning” [Greek: archē] when God created the earth & the rest of the universe.

 

[nfinke]

Then show me ONE example from Scripture-

See this is all you actually keep saying. Again, how the phrase is used in other places has literally no bearing on how it is used anywhere else. You keep restating this argument as if the Bible needs to be consistent in its use of language. This is not an argument.

marriage took place - “in the beginning” [Greek: archē ] when God created the earth & the rest of the universe.

Why did you spend like 3 full paragraphs agreeing with what I said? Yes, God made Adam and eve in the beginning. There’s no debating that. There is no aspect of the words “in the beginning” that say how long of a period that is. Because in the most literal sense, no God did not create Adam and Eve in the beginning. he created light and darkness, the firmament, plants, etc, and then Adam and then Eve at the very least 6 days after “the beginning”. Therefore “the beginning” refers to some arbitrary frame of time that is defined as “however long God took creating the world”.

So really all you’ve done is prove that Jesus quoted Genesis. Which ok, I didn’t really need anymore authentication of Genesis.

 

[EndTimes]

Any so-called ‘science’ which poses as proving God does not exist - is not ‘science’

There’s never been proofs clearly indicating that God does not exist

 

[EndTimes]

“You can’t prove a flying spaghetti monster doesn’t orbit Jupiter either”.

It would be a lot easier to prove that a flying spaghetti monster doesn’t orbit Jupiter
than it would be to disprove Catholicism’s Teachings on Adam and Eve as Being Actual / Real.

References Abound:

E.G. “HUMANI GENERIS” Encyclical as well as Scriptures and Catechism and more.

 

[RaisedCatholic]

how the phrase is used in other places has literally no bearing on how it is used anywhere else. You keep restating this argument as if the Bible needs to be consistent in its use of language. This is not an argument.

And what do you base this assumption on, besides your personal opinion? If you don’t take an exegetic hermeutics approach by allowing Scripture to explain Scripture, then virtually any individual verse can mean whatever the reader wants it to mean, which is subjective, and doesn’t communicate what God actually intended a particular verse to mean & communicate to the reader.

There is no aspect of the words “in the beginning” that say how long of a period that is. Because in the most literal sense , no God did not create Adam and Eve in the beginning. he created light and darkness, the firmament, plants, etc, and then Adam and then Eve at the very least 6 days after “the beginning”.

I don’t know why you are finding this so difficult By Moses saying “in the beginning,” he is referring to the time frame from the time God created the earth as a formless void & when He created light on a literal “day one,” and ended when He created Adam & Eve on a literal “day six.” And since each and every “day” is accompanied by “evening & morning,” no, it does not refer to “some arbitrary frame of time.” Again, the text does not allow for that subjective personal eisegesis of the text.

So really all you’ve done is prove that Jesus quoted Genesis.

He did more than just “quote Genesis.” Again, He purposely used “in the beginning” to refer to the time God created the earth & the universe as well as everything in it, including the Light, land, animals, and mankind, all in the same 24 hour 7 day “evening & morning” work week.

If you don’t believe “evening & morning” refers to a literal 24 hour day, then explain - outside of your subjective personal opinion - what Moses meant by “evening & morning.” Keep in mind, the writings of Moses are inspired, not your personal opinion.

 

[RaisedCatholic]

You can’t prove a flying spaghetti monster doesn’t orbit Jupiter either. What’s your point?

For one, no one has been able to prove historically the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, let alone claim he really exists, unlike God Who has been proven historically, as well as millions of people who profess to have spoken to Him. Plus, Jesus proved He was God by rising from the dead - something the Flying Spaghetti Monster could not do, since no one even believes he exists, let alone can’t prove he exists. And all it would take is a telescope to prove he’s not orbiting Jupiter. It is a really bad analogy.

 

[EndTimes]

And all it would take is a telescope to prove he’s not orbiting Jupiter. It is a really bad analogy.

 

[EndTimes]

It would be a lot easier to prove that a flying spaghetti monster doesn’t orbit Jupiter
than it would be to disprove Catholicism’s Teachings on Adam and Eve as Being Real

And too … That God does not Exist.

In connection with our Free Will, and Faith borne from Provided Evidences…
FAITH and so called and ill-defined PROOF? can not co-exist…

Do I really have to spell that understanding out?

 

[EndTimes]

Someone assist me on the “Quote Function”

 

[goout]

“You can’t prove a flying spaghetti monster doesn’t orbit Jupiter either”.

It would be a lot easier to prove that a flying spaghetti monster doesn’t orbit Jupiter
than it would be to disprove Catholicism’s Teachings on Adam and Eve as Being Actual / Real.

References Abound:

E.G. “HUMANI GENERIS” Encyclical as well as Scriptures and Catechism and more.

Can you please use the quote function when referring to someone else’s words? The ideas in your posts are almost impossible to separate.

 

[nfinke]

I never implied the language was subjective, just that it isn’t always used literally.

So, here’s what you are arguing: it is illogical for Moses to use “evening and morning” to describe anything other than a 24 hour day, because that is exclusively how he uses that phase everywhere else in the Torah.

Alright, heres what I found from a little research. As far as I can tell (in the KJV), Moses uses the words evening and morning to describe the passing of a day, 2 times in Exodus, 1 time in Numbers, once in Deuteronomy, and …SIX TIMES (obviously) in Genesis.

So literally 60% of the time he uses that phrase in all his writings, he’s using it to describe the creation. I don’t have a word for word memorization of the Toarh, but I assumed based on your language that he used that phrase all the time, but actually you are trying to use 40% of the usage to force undeniable definition on the majority. I mean like i said, I don’t think that argument holds water originally, but it definitely doesn’t now.

Also, since Jesus didn’t add anything to Genesis in that passage (except arguably what had to do with marriage), yes, he was essentially just quoting it. He didn’t change it (as you said he used the same words), he didn’t modify it. Also, for the last time, your assertion that “in the beginning” refers to the entire period of creation I agree with. And the fact that adam and eve were created at the end of the sequence of events I agree with. These aren’t the things we are arguing about, and Jesus using the same language Moses used doesn’t add anything to the argument. So unless you’re saying the scripture wasn’t divine until Jesus cited it I don’t know why you keep bringing this up.

 

[Gorgias]

Then show me ONE example from Scripture - either from the Old or New Testament - where any Biblical writer uses “evening & morning” to mean anything other than a literal 24 hour period. If you cannot, then you are imputing your personal opinion

So, do you mean something like Mt 12:40…?

Jesus said, “Just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.”

So, here we have Jesus Himself talking about the time between His burial (Good Friday) and His resurrection (Easter Sunday morning), which was literally not a 72-hour period, and calling it “three days and three nights”?

 

[1Lord1Faith]

His burial (Good Friday) and His resurrection (Easter Sunday morning), which was literally not a 72-hour period, and calling it “three days and three nights”?

To be fair, and not many people know this but its been handed down orally…on that Sunday morning someone near the tomb was cooking breakfast, and it got Jesus up earlier than even he expected.

 

[Pattylt]

Taking Genesis as completely literal left me with some problems.
When God created the animals, we assume He made them male and female…He never really said…yet when He made Adam, He only made one human and didn’t think Adam would need a female?

God never told Eve not to eat the fruit. We assume Adam must have told Eve what God said…but this isn’t mentioned…so, did Eve disobey God or just not believe her mate?

And we know that the story anthropomorphizes God but a literal reading has a God that walks and talks and humans can hide from Him yet Adam and Eve’s story is exact?

I’m sure there are apologetics to defend all of this. It just left me with a nice mythical story that held truths other than a literal interpretation.

 

[EndTimes]

There is plenty of scientific evidence that two fully formed modern humans weren’t the first “people” to exist.

Yes on the evidences - just as there’s evidences that Man did not “evolve” in any sort of manner as was described that must have had to have occurred - according to Darwin - with this focus upon “innumerable {mutation} transitions” - as understood by both Darwin himself as well as via today’s molecular and cellular biology.

Related,
Scientists do not even know how Life emerged from Chemicals… aka Abiogenesis Investigations.

That said, Evidences are Evidences - and not Proof or Law…