JEST2ASK

SugarHitman and others often attack evolution and other points of science by claiming that it is false based on basic flaws easily seen if it's supporters were not blinded by willful prejudice.

It seems to me that the foundation of the Bible's authority (and the faith in it's TRUTH @TM) is contained within the first five chapters of Genesis. I am not arguing if Genesis should be taken as literal history or can be read as allegory. I am not trying to point out conflicts within the text. Those subjects are for later inquiry.

I would like to know who wrote the original, when, in what language and how was this message accurately transmitted and preserved. It just seems to me that unless there is some sort of trail / record of custody the claims of later biblical authors (and current Christians) rest not on sand but on nothing at all.

While this is addressed especially to a certain type of Christian (and Sugarhitman specifically) I am hoping a discussion ensues where a consensus of ideas / viewpoints can be reached that will lead to resolving other issues.

I also welcome any comments / suggestions on the wording / construction of my question.

Joan of Bark

People who take the pre-Abrahamic portions of Genesis literally are not worth arguing with. It's like debating someone who believes Zeus hurls thunderbolts from Mount Olympus.

davidbach

I entirely agree, Joan.

But that was not the question. And the question is a fascinating one. Unfortunately, the answer has probably been lost.

I am no biblical scholar, but I understand that some portions of the texts are traceable to the Sumerians, who are a fascinating study in themselves. This includes the Noah/Utnapishtim flood story. Other parts are traceable to the Canaanites and possibly to Egyptian influences. In the marginal farmland of what is now Gaza and Palestine, poor crops frequently forced the population to take refuge in Egypt, apparently. This is likely to be the source of the "Moses in Egypt" story.

The really interesting stuff is who put it all together and in what order (and maybe why). For example, the idea of a very recent creation is rather novel - both the Sumerians and Egyptians knew better than that. There is a fairly consistent theme from multiple "gods" to a specific "YHWH/Jehovah" belonging to the tribe of Israel to the rather bold idea that the god of Israel was a "god of gods" somehow superior to the Gods of other tribes. Sadly, I suspect we will never know the details or even most of the broad picture of the sources and redaction of Genesis.

Do not let me userp the knowlege of the academics who post here - please correct and expand on my limited understanding.

David.

JEST2ASK

Joan I agree with you, but I am hoping to get at least token response from a YEC Christain.


I have attempted to get SugarHitman to respond but I see he is currently quite busy elsewhere.

JEST2ASK

I agree but trying to follow the logic :huh: of why it is to be taken as the literal and inerrant may provide both entertainment and enlightenment.

I have seen it claimed that the True Flood Story is what influenced flood myths of so many other cultures thus being evidence of it's accuracy.

Very good point as there are frequent famines mentioned in the Bible with various effects my Favorite is the story of Ruth.

Questions I also find fascinating.


:notworthy: Thanks for your comments I have used your comments in a response to SHM on another thread