Was the world created in 7 days?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 7777777Now
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TylerAlex said:
So… if the seven days creation is considered a myth… then what about the fall of man with Adam and Eve?

Once you discount creation in the literal sense, you then poke holes in most of Genesis. Without a literal interpretation of Original Sin, you now have taken the relevence of not only the Word of God in the Bible, but the Gospel message as well.

Slippery slope indeed.
Click to expand...
Do not confuse “myth” with “pack of lies.” A myth is a story that contains truth. We need to understand the literary genre of the time to discern the truth that the original authors meant to convey.

I don’t think the scientific mechanism for the creation of the earth was foremost in their minds (if, indeed, it was there at all). The ancients had a much different concept of history than we do. They were far less interested in the actual order of events than they were in the meaning of events.
 
TylerAlex said:
So… if the seven days creation is considered a myth… then what about the fall of man with Adam and Eve?

Once you discount creation in the literal sense, you then poke holes in most of Genesis. Without a literal interpretation of Original Sin, you now have taken the relevence of not only the Word of God in the Bible, but the Gospel message as well.

Slippery slope indeed.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is a real problem.
Too many moderately informed Catholics dismiss evolution-based criticisms with a handwave. “Ho ho we Catholics are not your ignorant fundamentalist sort. There are Catholics out there who are professional evolutionary biologists. Ho ho.”
There are some real questions to be asked. If we don’t believe in a literal Adam, what do we beelive about original sin?
 
Malcolm_McLean said:
There are some real questions to be asked. If we don’t believe in a literal Adam, what do we beelive about original sin?
Click to expand...
Amen to that!

THIS was my #1 stubbling block to almost NOT becoming Catholic. It seems that so many Catholics are willing to dicount the Creation account - toss it all out as a bunch of “myths” - what - like the Greek myths? Just some made up stories with a “hint” of truth. Along with that you toss out the Flood - Jonah & the Whale - I suppose you question the Daniel & the lion’s den too? It’s no wonder that Protestants think we don’t read the Bible - Oh we read it… we just don’t believe it’s true. :mad:
 
quasimodo said:
I don’t think the scientific mechanism for the creation of the earth was foremost in their minds (if, indeed, it was there at all). .
Click to expand...
What’s so hard about “In the begining God created the heaven and the earth…” Maybe what we need today is less “scientific mechansims” and more faith?"
 
Malcolm_McLean said:
Yes, it is a real problem.
Too many moderately informed Catholics dismiss evolution-based criticisms with a handwave. “Ho ho we Catholics are not your ignorant fundamentalist sort. There are Catholics out there who are professional evolutionary biologists. Ho ho.”
There are some real questions to be asked. If we don’t believe in a literal Adam, what do we beelive about original sin?
Click to expand...
Don’t all Catholics though have to believe in a literal Adam and a literal Eve, thus original sin? I myself do interpret Genesis literally as do many Catholics I have talked to as well as many apologetics and Magisterium, though I also know that many don’t. www.scripturecatholic.com apologetic John Salza interprets Genesis literally. One Austrian Cardinal (can’t remember name) spoke out against evolution, and even Pope Benedict XVI questioned evolution in a recent speech. I know that when I do become Catholic I will continue to hold on to my Genesis beliefs. I know Catholics can believe in evolution but don’t they have to believe in certain things as well such as: God created the world out of nothing, Adam and Eve are real people, not only that are the two original people that everyone comes from, original sin comes from them. Anything I missed? I can see where problems could arise between evolution and Genesis, as there have been some Catholics on this forum who believe in polygenism, etc. Obviously they are throughouly misinformed or reject the Magisterium’s teaching on this subject.
 
carol_marie said:
Amen to that!

THIS was my #1 stubbling block to almost NOT becoming Catholic. It seems that so many Catholics are willing to dicount the Creation account - toss it all out as a bunch of “myths” - what - like the Greek myths? Just some made up stories with a “hint” of truth. Along with that you toss out the Flood - Jonah & the Whale - I suppose you question the Daniel & the lion’s den too? It’s no wonder that Protestants think we don’t read the Bible - Oh we read it… we just don’t believe it’s true. :mad:
Click to expand...
This has been one of my big stumbling blocks as well. I emailed John Salza from scritpturecatholic.com and helped me out with this explaining that dogmatically the Church still holds that Genesis be interpreted literally, even though many don’t. But he says that many do interpret Genesis literally. It does just seem easier to accept Genesis and all of its teachings as truth in that it would create a lot less confusion. Even several Protestant churches are discussing evolution such as United Methodists, the other Lutheran church (not the Missouri Synod), etc. and its created much confusion as well among their church goers.
 
7777777Now said:
As a Catholic are you required to believe the world was created in 7 days as it says in Genesis?
Click to expand...
Your guess is as good as mine.

I have a ton of threads going in the sacred scripture forum. Until I get through the entire list of errors I have found in the bible I am hesitant to even read it anymore.

I will just hear it at Mass and continue to be amazed by how so much of it is loaded with contradictions and errors.
Click to expand...
 
Personally I think we get in really dangerous territory when we start chalking up any of the bible to Myth. Where do we draw the line between Myth and literal meaning. “Oh well the death of Jesus that was just a Myth, he didn’t really die on the cross.”

Now don’t I think the world was created in 7 24 hour periods of time either. I think that is a rather short sided approach too. On the same token, we are talking about God, who says he could do it that way if the wanted.

I really wish there could open discussion in science about the origin of the world. There are some very interesting theories out there, but it seems it would be impossible to discuss with out people insulting others intelligence.
 
Hellisreal said:
Your guess is as good as mine.

I have a ton of threads going in the sacred scripture forum. Until I get through the entire list of errors I have found in the bible I am hesitant to even read it anymore.

I will just hear it at Mass and continue to be amazed by how so much of it is loaded with contradictions and errors.
Click to expand...
It’s actually not though - our understanding may be flawed - but the Bible is inspired by God & is JUST as He intended it to be. God is NOT a God of confusion - there are no errors.
 
carol_marie said:
It’s actually not though - our understanding may be flawed - but the Bible is inspired by God & is JUST as He intended it to be. God is NOT a God of confusion - there are no errors.
Click to expand...
Well, God sure knew our understanding would be flawed.

sensing a circular argument coming on
But, I guess that is the best way to look at it. Not to wonder so much about the details.
 
Really just curious but where does that teaching come form? This is the first time I’ve ever heard it and would like to look it up myself.
 
What then are Catholics required to believe from the first 11 chapters of Genesis?
 
Okay even after reading that I still don’t see why people are calling it Myth. I see what I’ve always been taught the account of Creation is symbolic and we don’t understand exactly how. Not to quibble over words but for me Symbolic is a far cry form Myth.
 
Interesting - so Adam & Eve are just a “literary divice” - ? There was no Adam - there was no fall of Man … oh wait… my favorite… the part where Catholics say that Mary is the 2nd Eve - bunch of junk? Likewise - the verse that says that sin came into the world because of 1 man’s sin - garbage? Oh, not garbage… what am I saying, “literary divice.” Right.

If that is what the Catholic Church would have me believe - that the 1st 11 books of God’s Holy Word are “myths” - I would so walk away from the Catholic Church. I am willing to accept that we are not “Bible alone” - I WILL NOT accept that the Bible is a bunch of myths.
 
Myth /mɪθ/ Pronunciation Key - [mith] Pronunciation Key
–noun 1. a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, esp. one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
2. stories or matter of this kind: realm of myth.
3. any invented story, idea, or concept: His account of the event is pure myth.
4. an imaginary or fictitious thing or person.
5. an unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution.

It doesn’t imply its based in any truth either.
 
I’m very curious if your bible scholar instructor believes that Jesus actually performed a miracle by multiplying the loaves & the fishes to feed 5,000? Does he/she believe that Moses parted the Red Sea? Daniel & the Lion’s den - actually happened or just a myth? Same with Jonah & the Whale - true or myth? I can’t imagine he/she believes any of those are true since he/she totally discounts the Flood (being one of the first 11 books of the Bible).

How does he/she pick & choose which difficult things in the Bible that defy science to believe? How does any Catholic scholar?

Again, it’s no wonder Protestants say what they do about us with regards to the Bible. Pathetic.
 
carol_marie said:
Interesting - so Adam & Eve are just a “literary divice” - ? There was no Adam - there was no fall of Man … oh wait… my favorite… the part where Catholics say that Mary is the 2nd Eve - bunch of junk? Likewise - the verse that says that sin came into the world because of 1 man’s sin - garbage? Oh, not garbage… what am I saying, “literary divice.” Right.

If that is what the Catholic Church would have me believe - that the 1st 11 books of God’s Holy Word are “myths” - I would so walk away from the Catholic Church. I am willing to accept that we are not “Bible alone” - I WILL NOT accept that the Bible is a bunch of myths.
Click to expand...
Humans can sin, chimpanzees can’t. The most comon ancestor of humans and chimpanzees was much more like a chimpanzee than a human, but probably less intelligent than either. It certainly couldn’t sin either. So it follows that there must have been a first sin, committed by a creature on the human line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top