Confusion in Genesis

  • Thread starter Thread starter YoungCatholic86
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
buffalo said:
Religion as in “binding oneself to God”?
Click to expand...
Religion as in “Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, etc.” because I “have to agree with the dogma, the doctrine even if it’s proven scientifically wrong or historically inconsistent”.
 
johnnyjones said:
It must be clear that those Catholics who believe in most of the OT accounts should not always be lumped in with Protestant Fundamentalists (not that you said that but I’m reaching out to quell that perception).

What I see in the NT is the Genesis account being prominently displayed in a realistic way, it is not being shown in a symbolic or allegorical way. That can be reasonably defended, and it makes sense that these accounts be literal. I maintain that I will continue to defend Catholic doctrine using the scriptures. This obviously is not the Fundamentalist view. I will not espouse doctrines that the church opposes to the best of my ability.
Click to expand...
Speaking of the NT. Take a look at Romans 5: 12-21.
 
What I got from this thread is this: “One should not read the Genesis literally, but the narrative sure is literal, and it has to be interpreted as such”.
 
minichibi said:
What is the conclusion, then? That there is a distinction between the first evolution-produced flesh and bones man and woman and the spiritual Adam and Eve? I don’t get where this discussion is converging to.
Click to expand...
Creation of the Human Being, Pope Benedict XVI
“…then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being…”
Click to expand...
What is the human being? This question is posed to every generation and to each individual human being, for in contrast to the animals our life is not simply laid out for us in advance. What it means for us to be human beings is for each one of us a task and an appeal to our freedom. We must each search into our human-being-ness afresh and decide who or what we want to be as humans. In our own lives each one of us must answer, whether he or she wants to or not, the question about being human. What is the human being? The biblical account of creation means to give some orientation in the mysterious region of human-being-ness. It means to help us appreciate the human person as God’s project and to help us formulate the new and creative answer that God expects from each one of us.
Click to expand...
What does this account say? We are told that God formed the man of dust from the ground. There is here something at once humbling and consoling. Something humbling because we are told: You are not God, you did not make yourself, and you do not rule the universe; you are limited. You are a being destined for death, as are all things living; you are only earth. But something consoling too, because we are also told: The human being is not a demon or an evil spirit, as it might occasionally appear. The human being has not been formed from negative forces, but has been fashioned from God’s good earth. Behind this glimmers something deeper yet, for we are told that all human beings are earth. Despite every distinction that culture and history have brought about, it is still true that we are, in the last resort, the same. The medieval notion characterized in the dance of death that arose during the horrible experience of the black plague, which threatened everyone at the time, was in fact already expressed in this account: Emperor and beggar, master and slave are all ultimately one and the same person, taken from the same earth and destined to return to the same earth. Throughout all the highs and lows of history the human being stays the same – earth, formed from earth, and destined to return to it.
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict here is directing our attention towards our own “creation” - our acceptance of who we were created by, and the purpose we were created for.

We are all made from earth. We are all equal. We all have dignity. God’s breath has been breathed into us all. “We must each search into our human-being-ness afresh and decide who or what we want to be as humans.”
 
minichibi said:
What I got from this thread is this: “One should not read the Genesis literally, but the narrative sure is literal, and it has to be interpreted as such”.
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for the 50 chapters of Genesis.

As for a simple, logical suggestion regarding the first three chapters of Genesis, if one is interested in a Catholic interpretation of these three first chapters, then one starts with the Catholic doctrines which flow from these chapters.

Going at the first three chapters of Genesis alone can often lead to a mud puddle.
 
grannymh said:
I cannot speak for the 50 chapters of Genesis.

As for a simple, logical suggestion regarding the first three chapters of Genesis, if one is interested in a Catholic interpretation of these three first chapters, then one starts with the Catholic doctrines which flow from these chapters.

Going at the first three chapters of Genesis alone can often lead to a mud puddle.
Click to expand...
literally
 
minichibi said:
Religion as in “Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, etc.” because I “have to agree with the dogma, the doctrine even if it’s proven scientifically wrong or historically inconsistent”.
Click to expand...
If yo had to pick one right now, which one based on your knowledge possesses the “fullness of truth”?
 
grannymh said:
Speaking of the NT. Take a look at Romans 5: 12-21.
Click to expand...
The NT is replete with OT accounts presented with pure reality. The only defense those who reject OT accounts as literal is to say, “that’s what the people believed or could understand.”

Could they understand a man being God? Does Jesus tell stories that are identified by the church as parables (not real but make a point), but then talk about Genesis, Noah etc. without further clarity to show they are just symbols?

Would the blood of Christ be equated with a “fictional man” named Abel? These are just some of the topics the NT presents to show real accounts from a miraculous God in the OT.
 
buffalo said:
If yo had to pick one right now, which one based on your knowledge possesses the “fullness of truth”?
Click to expand...
there is none i do completely agree with, there is no absolute truth, but i would pick either catholic or orthodox.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top