Were the events of Genesis 1 revealed to humans via a dream?

[James_MC]

Science cannot support

A man levitating up into the sky (Christ’s ascension)

The scientific method is reductionist, so that it can deal with supernatural phenomena only insofar as they can be reduced to purely natural phenomena - iOW, to what they are not. So its method requires it to misconceive (say) the Ascension of Christ, and to miss the point of it entirely. That is a defect in the scientific method, which cannot advance human understanding when it is misapplied by being applied to matters that are outside its competence.

Change of location (so to call it) is the least important aspect of the Ascension of Christ. Vastly more important is what the Ascension is, and means, in relation to the Triumph, Kingship, and Offering of Christ the Ark of the Covenant, Who in His Ascension “goes up” to the Heavenly Jerusalem to take His Throne as King and Priest, Mediator & Intercessor, at His Father’s right hand. His Ascension is all of this, and more.

[James_MC]

@St.Roymond

Some have argued that Abraham is a real historical person put into a semi-historical setting.

True. And others are inclined to think Abraham is fiction. If he were historical, in a semi-historical setting, that would amount to a kind of verisimilitude; not to history.

At least some details about him are fiction, such as his impossible age at death of 175, and his age of 99 when begetting Isaac. His begetting six sons by Keturah at an age of over 137, after the death of Sarah, makes a nonsense of the supposedly miraculous begetting & conception of Isaac over 30 years before, and is extremely creepy, given his very great age of 137.

Actually there’s an historical event that fits the Babel story: the great ziggurat at Eridu would have been the largest ziggurat ever and may have rivalled the pyramids – if it had been finished, but it wasn’t. The situation involved multiple languages and an inability to communicate and was connected to a city being abandoned and (the) people scattering. With that information, the account strikes me as a story saying, “This is the rest of the story”, i.e. this is what was really going on as opposed to just the bare events.

Which is interesting, but is it appropriate to the Babel story for us to try to fit historical details to it ? One could, if one were so minded, interpret volcanic eruptions as caused by giants imprisoned by Zeus after the war of the Giants against the Olympians; but that would hardly be an adequate explanation of volcanic activity. If a story is meant to be a myth, it should be accounted for as an historical event. And it seems safe to say that the Babel story is a myth; even though it may have been influenced by realities such as ziggurats.

I think the story makes equally good, or better, sense, if taken as a Jewish parody of the sixth tablet of the Enuma elish - the so-called Babylonian epic of creation. The gods who build Marduk his ziggurat in Babylon, his chosen city, become - on this hypothesis - merely human builders in Genesis 11.1-9. If that is the case, it would agree with what seems to be, in Genesis 10, the reduction of the gods Ninurta & Asshur to merely human status, as Nimrod & Ashur. The name Nimrod seems to be a polemical distortion of the god’s name, for the root MRD in Hebrew = “rebel”. Just as Akkadian Bab-ili, “gate (i.e. city) of god”, is distorted by the author of Gen 11.1-9 into BLL (“to confuse”,)

[T_aquaticus]

@James_MC

It makes perfect sense as a myth with a theological message - perhaps as a Jewish reply to Babylonian (and other ?) creation-myths. Especially as other myths and passages in Genesis 1-11 appear to be intended as anti-Babylonian satire & polemic.

Agreed. The structure of Genesis 1 also seems to saying something deeper than a literal reading would suggest.

The days mirror each other in a kind of symmetry where God creates a realm and then fills it with creatures or objects.

I don’t think a vision would carry this sort of implied literary structure.

[St.Roymond]

@James_MC

That is a defect in the scientific method, which cannot advance human understanding when it is misapplied by being applied to matters that are outside its competence.

The defect lies in the humans who do the misapplying.

[St.Roymond]

@James_MC

His begetting six sons by Keturah at an age of over 137, after the death of Sarah, makes a nonsense of the supposedly miraculous begetting & conception of Isaac over 30 years before

I’d forgotten that detail!

@James_MC

Which is interesting, but is it appropriate to the Babel story for us to try to fit historical details to it ? One could, if one were so minded, interpret volcanic eruptions as caused by giants imprisoned by Zeus after the war of the Giants against the Olympians; but that would hardly be an adequate explanation of volcanic activity.

Two different things: for the volcanoes, it is an instance of making stuff up; for the Tower of Babel, it’s a matter of noting that a historical event has the same details as the biblical account.

@James_MC

I think the story makes equally good, or better, sense, if taken as a Jewish parody of the sixth tablet of the Enuma elish - the so-called Babylonian epic of creation.

I’ve heard the contra-Babylon hypothesis before, but it works more effectively if it uses a historical event that people knew about.

@James_MC

The gods who build Marduk his ziggurat in Babylon, his chosen city, become - on this hypothesis - merely human builders in Genesis 11.1-9. If that is the case, it would agree with what seems to be, in Genesis 10, the reduction of the gods Ninurta & Asshur to merely human status, as Nimrod & Ashur. The name Nimrod seems to be a polemical distortion of the god’s name, for the root MRD in Hebrew = “rebel”. Just as Akkadian Bab-ili, “gate (i.e. city) of god”, is distorted by the author of Gen 11.1-9 into BLL (“to confuse”,)

That just suggests that the text as we have it was edited during the Exile. That was a common way of doing polemics for over a millennium in the region – take something known to all and fit it to some deities, but change it up.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@St.Roymond

and as the same writer put it elsewhere,

we preach Christ crucified

which is the real foundation of everything, as Jesus said,

It is finished!

Whats finished? We are all still here…clearly you misinterpret the phrase!

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@St.Roymond

Adam, it gets really tiring to read your words attributing things to people that not only have they never said but have opposed

So long as you keep leading people astray with that, i will call you out on it.

If you used appropriate bible references, indeed if you used any at all…we wouldnt have a problem here.

[St.Roymond]

@adamjedgar

Whats finished? We are all still here…clearly you misinterpret the phrase!

Read the whole bit together:

@St.Roymond

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

and as the same writer put it elsewhere,

we preach Christ crucified

which is the real foundation of everything, as Jesus said,

It is finished!

@adamjedgar

If you used appropriate bible references, indeed if you used any at all…we wouldnt have a problem here.

You can’t hide behind Bible verses to justify lying about others.

Pay attention to Exodus 20:16.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@St.Roymond

Read the whole bit together:

The whole bit is your claim “it is finished is the foundation of
Christianity”…again, it hasnt finished yet as we are all still here!

The reason we are all still here is because the timeline of events as explained via the Old Testament Sanctuary and its services/festivals has not yet been completed.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@St.Roymond

You can’t hide behind Bible verses to justify lying about others

Ahahahaha…that is a silly excuse…quoting bible texts to prove your theology is wrong is not going against exodus 20:16… that is what you are doing by making theological claims that are not supported in the bible.

You have this completely ass about.

[St.Roymond]

@adamjedgar

The whole bit is your claim “it is finished is the foundation of
Christianity”…again, it hasnt finished yet as we are all still here!

Go read what I wrote.
It gets tiresome having to repeat myself when you misquote.

@adamjedgar

The reason we are all still here is because the timeline of events as explained via the Old Testament Sanctuary and its services/festivals has not yet been completed.

Everything of the OT sanctuary was fulfilled in Christ – nothing is left to be done.
We are still here because the fullness of the Gentiles has not been reached.

@adamjedgar

quoting bible texts to prove your theology is wrong is not going against exodus 20:16

Stop dodging: you lied about others here, and you tried to justify it by throwing out a smokescreen of Bible verses. It is the lies that are contrary to Exodus 20.

[St.Roymond]

@adamjedgar

what about

1. the second comng and,
2. Satan paying tue responsibility for sin (laying on of hands onto the scapegoat as demonstrated in Old Testament Sqnctuary Service?)

The Second Coming is not taught in the OT.
Christ was the scapegoat.

@adamjedgar

you are claiming that your being overwhelmed by direct referencing is lying

No. I am stating that you regularly and in a specific instance made false statements about what others have said in this forum. In this case, you said:

@adamjedgar

In your claims you think the resurrection is what saves us…that is theologically wrong.

And I corrected you. Instead of acknowledging your error, you threw out a pile of irrelevant scripture.

“Everyone reading here” knows that you do this and then retreat to the fact that you throw out lists of Bible verses that have no relevance. This is dodging when you should be repenting!

[Paraleptopecten (Timothy Campbell)]

@St.Roymond

The Second Coming is not taught in the OT.

There are some passages that at least seem to look forward to an ultimate form of the Kingdom of God, but I can’t think of any that explicitly speak of the Parousia.

[James_MC]

@St.Roymond

Actually there’s an historical event that fits the Babel story: the great ziggurat at Eridu would have been the largest ziggurat ever and may have rivalled the pyramids – if it had been finished, but it wasn’t.

That accounts for a single detail of the tower of Babel story. It does not account for any of the other details, and it does not explain the Hebrew folk etymology of the Akkadian place-name Babili.

The details of the story are accounted for if the story is based not on an historical event, but on various details of Babylonian culture, such as its architecture, religion, literature & language. There is no reason - other than force of habit, reinforced over many centuries - to regard the story as a record of an historical event. As Jewish mythology, the story raises no difficulties and makes perfectly good sense: within the literary unit Gen 1-11; and within Genesis as a whole; and within the Bible as a whole.

[St.Roymond]

@James_MC

That accounts for a single detail of the tower of Babel story. It does not account for any of the other details

Did you read beyond the opening statement?:

The situation involved multiple languages and an inability to communicate and was connected to a city being abandoned and (the) people scattering.

ALL of the details are covered except the theological interpretation.

@James_MC

There is no reason - other than force of habit, reinforced over many centuries - to regard the story as a record of an historical event.

When all the details match something historical, there is no reason to dismiss a connection.

@James_MC

As Jewish mythology

From what I learned in grad school, Jewish mythology tended to be mythologized history, not something invented – and that held true even when adapting other literature for theological use (polemic).