#32,701 in Books
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product
Reddit mentions of The Genesis Enigma: Why the First Book of the Bible Is Scientifically Accurate
Sentiment score: 1
Reddit mentions: 2
We found 2 Reddit mentions of The Genesis Enigma: Why the First Book of the Bible Is Scientifically Accurate. Here are the top ones.
or
- Zero calories, zero glycemic impact, zero aftertaste, and zero worries.
- A perfect blend from Stevia (Reb-A) and Monk Fruit.
- Tastes like raw sugar, rich and smooth without aftertaste.
- 4 drops per serving. Compact design offers a lot of servings.
- Made in USA
Features:
Specs:
| Color | Multicolor |
| Height | 8.4 Inches |
| Length | 5.5 Inches |
| Number of items | 1 |
| Release date | October 2010 |
| Weight | 0.63 Pounds |
| Width | 0.7 Inches |
The answer to your question is complex. First, if you carefully read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, they seem to describe different events. Many Christians, if they even choose to take Genesis literally, separate Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 into theologically separate events as well - Genesis 1 shows God's sovereignty over creation; Genesis 2 shows his closeness to man. (An interesting read but off-topic read on Genesis 1 is The Genesis Enigma by Andrew Parker, the scientist who best explained the Cambrian Explosion as life evolved. )
Additionally, one does not need to take the events of the Garden of Eden literally for the story to still be true. Many of the elements of the story show great symbolism. Many of the church fathers took Genesis to be allegory, although many did not (see this page from Wikipedia). I don't find it hard to believe that God, at some point, either granted souls to a hominid species, and that we subsequently rejected him.
The story may not be literal, and it may just be an explanation of why things are they way they are. However, I do believe that the Bible is theologically accurate, and as this is a point of theology (that we live in a world in need of redemption and we ourselves need redemption), I'm content to trust the Bible and the church.
I suppose another way to say it would that those who were first contacted by God rejected him, and that's messed us up. It really doesn't matter what exactly happened.
> I've never been able to see how the seven days thing is non-literal. But I come from a background of literalism.
I came from the same background...
Eventually what shifted my view was that I realized "all truth is God's truth" and there is no need for there to be discrepancy between the Bible and science. Theistic evolution is able to fit the narrative in Genesis.
>It is a constant battle between "this is literal" and "well... that doesn't match up with evidence so it can't be literal".
Agreed, and I'm okay with that. We are called to test everything.