Originally posted by avalanchethecat
[b]Do you understand the difference between interpretation and application ?
Yes thanks.
Anyway, I doubt that in other areas of life you so easily throw up your hands and say "This guy says this. That guy says the other. I'm just baffled." You study, you weigh evidence for a view. You decide which seems more plausible.
Whatever ...[text shortened]... ources, I would almost certainly admit to bafflement, although I'm not big on hand gestures.[/b]
==============================
Whatever the subject, if both views are based on unverified and unverifiable sources, I would almost certainly admit to bafflement,
==============================
No man was there in the creation of the world. Even if we had an account of the first man Adam, he could only tell us of things after he came into being.
It is my opinion, at the present time, that some of what I read in Genesis may be that which was passed down from very early humans, perhaps Adam included.
But if so, anything BEFORE man arrives on the scene has to either be pure fiction, conjecture, or revelation from Someone who was here pre-dating man.
In fact, the problem of who taught man how to speak is not as easy as you may think. And I have seen persuasive arguments that man had to have learned how to talk from someone already talking.
To me there is one tell tale indication that the Genesis must come from a divine mind. And that is the matter of
"the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" verses
"the tree of life"
The thing which strikes me as being too wise to have originated from the human mind is this. Both good and evil are on one tree. I would expect that human beings would have written it this way:
There were two trees, one the tree of the knowledge of good and the other the tree of the knowledge of evil.
This perfectly fits the typical ethical concept of all peoples. But the dichotomy seems too wise to attribute to man's typical moral consideration.
Both the knowledge of good and evil are on on tree, a negative tree. And on the other tree is the tree of life.
This one simple scheme in Genesis three persuades me that the writing is divinely inspired. Who could have thought of such a thing ? I don't even think an Aristotle or a Socrates or a Confucius could have imagined this.
The knowledge of good and evil are on one tree and over against it is a tree of life. Think about it a little.