|
MojoPokey: Good points, however I'm just using the standard KJV of the Bible that most creationism is based on. I myself wouldn't even risk going near the apocrypha or other sources/legends/mythsology. I'm not enough of a scholar to try it.
If the genesis account is taken less literally and with a bit of leeway thrown in for translation errors, then there's too little info given in it to base a decision or philosophy of the creation on it. One can't take one word and say that that is the definitive way things happened and yet allow other ideas.
One example is the phrase to 'have dominion over' when referring to the life on earth.
Too many people have taken this to mean 'dominate' whereas I'd suspect a true god would have man be 'responsible' for them rather than superior to them. But with the current translation, that's all I have. A supposition.
If original sin was 'intercourse' then how were they breaking the law of God when told to be fruitful? That's another one I can't get my head around.
|