Forgive me, but quoting a passage does not prove that you take it in a specific manner. Jesus used Scripture theologically and within the the beliefs of the people he was addressing. We do not have to believe in a flat earth, a solid dome over it, Heaven above and Sheol below to be a Christian.
Richard
Out of curiosity, what is your take on Exodus justifying the sabbath by saying that God created the earth, the sea, and all that is in them in six days and on the seventh day he rested? Yes ancients could have referred to the stories of Genesis 1-11 in such a manner for theological purposes as they did the Book of Enoch and Last Testament of Moses but why would God do what he did in Exodus if its not meant to be taken literally?
I have a question for those who are reading this topic. What spirit was it that motivated the writing of Genesis 1-11?
If 1-11 is just the thoughts, ideas and ANE beliefs about a god they believed in, how did Genesis 12 miraculously change to reality?
What spirit influenced 1-11 and what spirit made the prophets, the apostles and Jesus believe it was the very Word of God?
This is an unhelpful conflation of history and reality. Figurative language can also describe reality, just as non-figurative language can describe the unreal. (Almost all fiction is written in a narrative style that we only know is not “reality” because we have access to reality to compare it to.) Claiming that Gen 1-11 is not history, is not anyway near the same thing as claiming it doesn’t talk about reality. Christians would all say that “God is the Creator of the world and humanity” “Humans are created to bear God’s image” “Humanity sinned and damaged their relationship with God,” “There is only one true God,” “Creation is good,” “God judges sin, but provides means of grace and redemption,” are all claims about reality. Whatever other theological message you could derive from Gen 1-11, it would be a claim about reality. So this insinuation that if a Christian views Gen 1-11 as something other than historical narrative, they must some other “spirit” than God inspired it, is a bit uncharitable. Plenty of the Psalms involve no history, and we have no problem saying they are inspired Scripture.
False prophets were lead by a false spirit, the true prophets of God were lead by the Spirit of God. So my question still is, what spirit is behind Genesis 1-11. Basically, which spirit spoke these words?
@Clovis_Merovingian, as I said above you need to look at the broader context when you interpret a passage from the Bible.
It looks as if you have not done your homework or you would know that the Ten Commandments are not only found in Exodus, but also in Deuteronomy 5:6-21.
Also that the Fourth Commandment on the Sabbath in the Deuteronomy version does not mention the Creation.
Deuteronomy 5:12-15 (NIV2011)
12 “Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the LORD your God has commanded you.
13 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
14 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns, so that your male and female servants may rest, as you do.
15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.
Therefore there is more than one basis for this commandment.
I am sure you know that the Jewish leaders attacked Jesus because He healed, did not rest, on the Seventh Day. Of course today most Christians do not keep the Sabbath and make the First Day the Lord’s Day.
John 5:16-18 (NIV2011)
16 So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him.
17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.”
18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
Thus Jesus disputed the plain meaning of the Genesis 2:2-3. We need to use the NT in our understanding of the OT including John 1:1-3 especially concerning these difficult matters.
Yahweh inspired all of Scripture. None of it was dictated.
I have a question for you, Cody_G. Both St Paul (Colossians 2:17) and the unknown author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 10:1), state that the Law of Moses in both its legislative requirements and its stories is a mere shadow of the reality we have in Christ. So, to put things in your terms, if the Holy Spirit inspired the life of Christ, what spirit inspired a mere shadow and not the reality?
If you read the other version in Deuteronomy you will see that the reference to Exodus is not there. The pre-amble to the law is edited in. Chances are that the tablets had the bare minimum on them due to both the space available and the time needed to “write” them. The length of time up on the mountain would suggest that the “finger of God” is actually Moses. Which would tally with New Testament Theology.
Genesis 1 establishes the Sabbath, but only inasmuch as it compresses the 8 day Babylonian creation into 6. (On two days God does 2 things).
The bible is not meant to be used as a history book. It sets God in History. It uses history. But there were no human witnesses to the beginning of time. Creation myths are a part of many cultures. As human knowledge increases so the need to rely on myths decreases. Trying to hold onto Genesis 1 (-11) as history only weakens belief in God.
Richard
Gregoreite (and Christy), I will gladly answer your question but please answer this first for me.
Were the commands, statutes and ordinances in the Law from God or man?
I believe they were inspired by God, but communicated by people in a specific time, place, and culture.
They were certainly from man, for see how Jesus responded in Matthew 19:
“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?” Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.” (Matthew 19:7-8 NIV)
Clearly a human being (Moses) has played a central role in the giving of the Law, albeit in an imperfect way. So the question is whether the Law was also from God. If so, then the question cannot be answered in a binary way, that is, in an “either or” way. So the framing of your question will not lead you to the truth.
Christy, so as not to take away from Clovis’s original request of prayer, I would rather start a new topic, if that’s ok. I will post it later, the title will be along the lines of Is the Law from God or man?
I would imagine this topic has been discussed over and over…but since I have not been a member of the forum very long I would not have been involved.
Gregoreite, I will answer your question there. Remind me if by chance I forget.
I will pray, but I am like you, I believe early Genesis must be taken as true. As I figured, no one will poiint you to a page where Gen 1-11 is treated as true. and not YEC. It is fully evolutionary. Start there and then go where your want on my page.
Glenn, I note where William Lane Craig considers the possibility of Heidelberg man as being Adam. Any thoughts as to how that relates to your work?
Hi Phil, Recent work has almost ruled H. heidelbergensis out of being our ancestor. Of the Human/Neanderthal split Lawton wrote:
"“More consequentially, the date of this split has been pushed way back. The latest estimate comes from a remarkable cache of fossils called the Sima hominins, the remains of at least 28 ancient humans found in a cave called Sima de los Huesos (pit of bones) in the Atapuerca mountains of northern Spain. They are 430,000 years old and were long believed to be H. heidelbergensis. But in 2016 their DNA - the oldest ancient human DNA ever sequenced- revealed that they were actually Neanderthals, and pushed the split between modern humans and Neanderthals/Denisovans back to between 550,000 and 765,000 years ago. That all but rules out H. heidelbergensis and points the finger at an earlier species. ‘For about 35 years, I’ve argued that Homo heidelbergensis represents the most reasonable last common ancestor for Neanderthals and modern humans,’ says Stringer. 'I don’t believe that any more.’” Graham Lawton, “Becoming Human”, New Scientist, April 3, 2020, p.40-41
SAdly I saw an article that William Lane Craig has ceased his search for Adam. It seems everyone is banishing Adam and Eve from our theology. Christians just never looked far enough back in time because of our prejudice about small brained hominids being ‘unworthy’ of us. I don’t know which is worse, being made from dirt or made from a small brained hominid. lol
Hmm, that article you cite is so recent maybe my source for him giving up on Adam and Eve is wrong. I would try to contact him about my views, but every big wig I contact just thinks I am a crazy nutter. They are not as a rule, interested in hearing a new position.
Edited to add, the interview claiming he gave up on Adam and Eve is from May 21 2020. I don’t listen to hour long tapes but from what I did listen to, it sounds like he has fallen to Vinema’s arguments about population genetics without ever looking further back in time than anatomically modern man.
It is sad I have so little time left cause I have failed at what I think God called me to, and I watch everyone ceasing to believe in the classical Christian doctrines and it makes me very sad
How do you know that ‘ancients’ took the Book of Enoch and Last Testament of Moses - do you mean the Ascension or Assumption of Moses? - ‘theologically’ as opposed to literally?
Why do you ask why would God do what he did in Exodus if it’s not meant to be taken literally, when He didn’t do it? That it is a myth? Like all of Genesis. Which is not an extreme position at all of course.
I pray for the spirit of a sound mind for all and each of us wherever our heads are in all of this.
Hi @Clovis_Merovingian,
If you don’t mind a reply from an agnostic, here’s my two-bits.
First, you clearly value your faith - that’s fine, and more power to you. I find that when I am considering deep matters and the answer is not apparent, it can be useful to consider the question itself. Are you asking the right question, or is there a different way of asking that leads to a helpful conclusion. I also find that sometimes the value of the question is in the consideration itself (the journey not the destination).
Anyway, wishing you peace, and for what it’s worth I will offer a prayer on your behalf with all the sincerity I can muster. I can make no promises about efficacy. 
Hey gbob I saw this and saw that you were dying. If what you are doing is from God then you will not be able to stop it even if you don’t live to see it. Your work will survive you and thrive apart from your mortal coil so if you believe what you are saying comes from God you shouldn’t worry that you’ve failed and that your mission was in vain. Missions from God are never in vain.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.