steveorino

That doesn't sound like a question from a man who said he had years of Hebrew ... [emphasis mine to spur your memory] steveOrino

Perhaps it is my rambling. My purpose wasn't to "prove" anything except ther are other ways of interpreting Genesis besides the way Fundy atheists & Christians do. steveOrino

This is how I interpret two famous accounts in Genesis (a portion of one of my blogs) So vastly different than trying to make a science or history book out of Genesis God is both creative and relational. We see God’s creativeness in the design of the universe. In this universe we see diversity and purpose. Billions and billions of stars and planets surround our world. Most of them invisible to the naked eye, yet they are part of God’s plan for our world. To me this illustrates God is creative beyond all measure. God’s creations on earth are equally diverse. Billions of bugs and animals, along with billions of people are as diverse as the stars are numerous in the skies. God made us to be unique and I believe he relishes in that fact of his creation. As mankind’s population grew so did our knowledge and skills. We were created with the ability to make choices. It is that ability to choose our own paths that produce the dichotomy of God’s creation that grieved him. We are free to choose paths that take us away from God as well as to choose the paths that draw us closer. Mankind’s choices fractured the relation we were created for. God was seeking communion with man, but only on a level that included man’s free will. It is mankind’s free will that makes our relationship with God genuine and intimate. However, every desire of man was evil and contrary to the nature of God. God’s own free allowed him to bring destruction to his creation. After this judgment mankind’s penchant for evil had not changed, but God’s response to man’s evil did. Man’s sin broke the relationship we had with God. In the Biblical account our sin drove God to cast man farther east from paradise, and in many ways further from God. God’s response to the descendants of Noah was different than God’s initial response to Adam’s family. Instead of moving them farther east, and farther away from himself, God began to draw man nearer to him. Through his prophets, his son, and his spirit, God worked again to restore the relationship he had with mankind from the beginning. steveOrino

It is amazes me how easily the Bible can be understood as "the Word of God" when you read it in the light of ... 1) The biblical writer is writing to HIS generation using HIS words and idioms most likely about events happening near or around their time. 2) That difficult passages are read in the light of clear passages 4) The ultimate purpose of the Bible is to point to JC 5) If you will resist the urge to see yourself, your denomination, your political party, your country as the sole reason certain passages were written. 6) That all truth is God's truth regardless of who on earth says it. If it is "true" it is God's truth. 7) If it clearly contradicts JCs teaching then you have misinterpreted or misapplied it. JMO steveOrino

I agree steveOrino

Reminds me of a hilarious story. One of my kid's friends received an email that said "would you like to send an attachment to your friends that will delete all their exe files? Click on this link." Of course the kid did thinking he would be the wise guy, and as soon as he clicked it, the virus started deleting his exe files. steveOrino

agreed. But come on man, 3 seconds of the Helen Keller (blind) TM is always good. steveOrino

Given what He had to work with I think He did a pretty good job. steveOrino

So does that mean God was bullshiting them with that story? or do you think the writer misinterpreted what God said (in that case God wasn't speaking clearly). If there was a big miscommunication then that would make the rest of the bible suspect also. Apart from a few selected passages, I don't think God dictated (spoke) anything. Really!! How do you know which passages were dictated? Maybe where God said, "write this down ..." Maybe the writers only wrote that to give it a better narrative flow. I'm sure it carried some weight.

No doubt we would. Of course we know that is not what he was implying, but spin it your way ... religion & politics. steveOrino

So does that mean God was bullshiting them with that story? or do you think the writer misinterpreted what God said (in that case God wasn't speaking clearly). If there was a big miscommunication then that would make the rest of the bible suspect also. Apart from a few selected passages, I don't think God dictated (spoke) anything. Really!! How do you know which passages were dictated? Maybe where God said, "write this down ..." steveOrino

So does that mean God was bullshiting them with that story? or do you think the writer misinterpreted what God said (in that case God wasn't speaking clearly). If there was a big miscommunication then that would make the rest of the bible suspect also. Apart from a few selected passages, I don't think God dictated (spoke) anything. steveOrino

Given that scenario I think most theological scholars would have a different look at the purpose of Genesis. steveOrino

But the eternal truths they espose are good for ANY generation. I know you said you went to Hebrew school. I interviewed a lot of Rabbis when I was working on my bachelor's degree. I never met a single one that thought Genesis account of creation was meant to be a science or even a history book. They, as well as my professors, saw it as ancient man's interaction with God explaining the relationship therein steveOrino

Or man wrote what he understood from the revelation God gave him. What would be the problem with that? You actually think it would make more sense that God would supernaturally impose his wisdom of the vastness of creation on early man and that man would be able to make sense of it, and his readers (and listeners as it was originally oral history) would comprehend it? Or do you like think like the fundys do that the Bible was written to be interpreted by mankind in the 21st century? steveOrino

I guess that is where it is subjective. I've had the opportunity to film a lot of TMs before became one. Some looked so bored you had to think their job was the worst in the world, and it distracted from the excitement of the video. Some did so many antics -- fly, swim, , etc. it destroyed the video, plus made it almost impossible to keep a decent fall rate. Then there were those that smiled, made one or two simple gestures that added to the fun. Give me the latter. steveOrino

I guess that would be a question you'd have. My questions would be a lot different. Why would you not ask this question, as it is rather pertinent to you beliefs? Whether or not God will perform tricks to convince me he is real is not pertinent to my belief system. Maybe yours ... not mine. steveOrino

If it is a metaphor, what details specifically are you saying is wrong? Years from now in a planet of the apes apocolyptic future someone unearths an "American History book" and "Gone with the Wind" do you think it would be hard to tell the difference between the two? steveOrino

It is too late for what is right. Your best move now is what is best. steveOrino

So basically you are just fine with the status quo....right.. got it.. Hell, no. I'm for protecting children. Politcizing his offense weakens it by polarizing it. If Republicans rise to his defense it will be for the sake of the party ... child safety be damned. I'm sorry you don't seem to understand that. steveOrino

I always check on Snopes. I wish my email buddies would do the same. steveOrino

I already answered you. IMO, the purpose of Genesis is not to describe the creation of the world, but using a story to tell about the relationship between God and man, and God's redemptive nature. steveOrino

I agree Republicans are as hypocritical as anyone ... maybe more. My point still stands. To politicize this distracts from the justice these kids need. steveOrino

Book? This is the era of the internet ... SNOPES. http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/kinsley.asp steveOrino