As Darwin published his Theory of Evolution, a split emerged between religion and science. Since then, like driving wedges into a tree stump, the opposing sides have hammered their views tightly into what has become a large divide. This modern split has been the most divisive ever.

    

Why Bother?

Chapter 1 Part 1: Why Bother?

As Darwin published his Theory of Evolution, a split emerged between religion and science.  Since then, like driving wedges into a tree stump, the opposing sides have hammered their views tightly into what has become a large divide.  This modern split has been the most divisive ever.

 

Many scientists now refuse to discuss religious beliefs- some because they detest them, others because they fear retaliation from employers, government, etc…  Religion has become a taboo topic laced with career ending lawsuits and even jail-time.  Freedom of religion has now become “freedom from religion” for those who detest it, and modern religion is largely at fault.  Something has had to give in this conflict, and for most, it has been their spiritual beliefs.  It should come as no surprise that the problem’s resolution will involve criticism of religion.  Does modern religion really want a solution to this problem?

 

Most students of science have lived lifelong with this creation-centered conflict.  They have used many substantiated theories and completely verifiable scientific laws, and as a result, understand well the rigor of the scientific method.  Science, although not perfect, is about finding the truth no matter what it is.  Only that which is provable and/or logical is science.  Examples of science, to name only a few, are cosmology including the Big Bang Theory, biology with its Theory of Evolution, and geology with its many age dating methods.  As reason predicts, these scientific topics all fit together perfectly.  They are not some secret conspiracy against God.  The natural sciences are in fact the study of creation, and at least in general, are undeniably true.

 

Inevitably, many religions condemn the sciences- especially the Theories of Evolution and the Big Bang.  Instead of improving their biblical interpretations with the truth from science, many simply reject all that is contrary.  Many fight “religiously” to prevent public schools from teaching modern science.  They even contort the Bible to fit their religious beliefs.  Their religions are stagnant, and life is leaving them.  Then, there are the endless unanswered questions, many from science; all of which beg for reason; all of which beg for the truth; a few of which follow.

 

If the Bible is the truth, how could the creation story be contrary to science?  If God created everything in six days, how could Earth be billions of years old?  Why did God make many species of plants and animals only to destroy them?  Did God make a mistake or just change his mind about dinosaurs?  How could the ancients have known about creation since they were not there?  If we evolved from monkeys, how could we have a soul?  What is a soul anyway?  Is it okay to know how God makes things?  How could the creation story be myth yet God be real?  Is myth acceptable when the general message is good?  Wouldn’t a true creation story prove the existence of God?  Why doesn’t God just show himself and eliminate all doubt?  Shouldn’t it be okay to question the Bible?  Is religion the truth about the Bible?  Is the Bible so uselessly vague that it could mean anything?  Is God vague?  Faced with unending questions, many have assumed the creation story is common mythology.

 

Biblically, creation is evidence of God’s existence, yet many “believers” claim that the creation story is un-provable and is intended to be a test faith.  Still others faithfully believe that the creation story some how transcends common truth.  However, those who stand rigidly behind their religious explanations will continue to be stuck with the fact that they cannot possibly prove the creation story true; at least not with any information that they have been willing to accept.  They generally do not accept modern science.

 

Since they have not been able to make sense of it, many “believers” think humankind was not meant to understand the creation story.  Yet, what possible purpose could a confusing biblical story serve?  One should expect the Bible to clarify rather than uselessly confuse its readers.  Moreover, one should expect a true creation story to make perfect sense in light of modern science.

 

There are many blatant technical problems with biblical creation- problems with interpretations at least.  First and perhaps most fundamentally, biblical creation is not science, and never will be, but instead is a witnessed account of creation.It offers no scientific explanations.Other problems arise from theology’s failure to recognize the story’s description of changes in Earth’s early atmosphere.Once beyond those failures, and with the addition of modern science, three simple keys to a full understanding of the creation story remain.

 

1) The creation story is about Earth and the story’s coverage began when Earth was in its infancy, when it was already orbiting the Sun.

 

2) The creation story author saw from ground level each of the scenes that make up the creation story- the common perspective of all of humanity, ancient and modern.

 

3) Each scene represents, not the beginning but instead, the substantial completion of the essentials to human survival such as air in a visibly clear atmosphere, water, land, and food.

 

The creation story’s scenes were displayed to the story’s author in what might be called a series of presentations in modern times.  There were eight presentations.  The entire series of presentations, like a TV mini-series, lasted six days.  The scenes were, and are now, correctly ordered.

 

Science, an ever-improving understanding of creation, already proves these points and much more.  One need not believe in God to see that the creation story is both provably true and substantive.  In fact, what some would call mysticism is generally unacceptable in any proof.  However, once proven true, it is impossible to explain the biblical creation story’s ancient existence unless a supreme being exists as well.

 

Why should one bother to know for sure of the existence God?  Assuming that God does exist, clearly, that knowledge is the single most important thing anyone could know!

 

If one is to get closer to the truth, one must understand the perspective of the person telling the truth.

אם זה אחד להיעשות יותר קרוב לאמת, אחד חייב להבין את נקודת המבט של בן האדם אומר לאמת. ,

το ένα είναι να πάρει πιο κοντά στην αλήθεια , μία mustpropius Vero est ut σε Una , intelligendum est de homine respectu Certum enarrans veritatem . να κατανοήσουν την προοπτική του προσώπου λέει την αλήθεια .

 to éna eínai na párei pio kontá sti̱n alí̱theia , mía mustpropius Vero est ut se Una , intelligendum est de homine respectu Certum enarrans veritatem . na katanoí̱soun ti̱n prooptikí̱ tou prosó̱pou léei ti̱n alí̱theia .
to éna eínai na párei pio kontá sti̱n alí̱theia , mía mustpropius Vero est ut se Una , intelligendum est de homine respectu Certum enarrans veritatem . na katanoí̱soun ti̱n prooptikí̱ tou prosó̱pou léei ti̱n alí̱theia .


propius vero est ut in una , intelligendum est de homine respectu certum enarrans veritatem.
The End Result

Chapter 1 Part 2: The End Result

After reading this book, expect an understanding of the literal biblical creation story that is simple yet in complete and profound agreement with modern science. This book does not offer a compromise. Instead, this analysis is extensive and covers, with modern science, every discernible detail in the biblical creation story. Every word and phrase will make technical sense, as will issues with the timing of the creation story’s events. One’s perception of God (YAHWEY) and of his creation will change forever.

 

The biblical creation story is a tangible witnessed account of Earth’s transformation into a livable planet. It was witnessed in a manner that is completely explained and is both simple and obvious. The witnessed scenes of creation show completed levels of atmosphere, geology, and biology and includes life that has survived extinctions. The scenes reflect what has been allowed to exist even until today.

 

Statements that have eluded understanding in modern times such as the division of the waters above and below the firmament are rendered obvious in their meaning, as is the entire creation story. The likelihood that the creation story is true by simple chance is non-existent. One will be able to claim with scientifically provable certainty that, over the course of six days, Moses witnessed the completion of every major event in the transformation of Earth into a livable planet. Moreover, the witnessed events are in perfect order.

 

The creation story is understandable and even simple; as one should expect; yet it is sufficiently detailed to impress any technical person. In fact, the creation story is solid, witnessed, evidence for the validity of even recent scientific theories and discoveries including atmospheric processes, geology, and biology. The eons and eras from biology and geology are in perfect chronological agreement with the biblical creation story. Conversely, science is excellent evidence for the truth of the creation story.

 

Most prominent among the sciences that support the creation story are biology and geology with evolution and extinctions.

 

Consider the creation story’s “day 5”: And God (powers) said, “Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven” (Gen 1:20). First, consider how unlikely it is that the ancients guessed the sea as the origin for birds- their valid evolutionary origin. Note: even today, many in theology think this origin for birds, a direct quote from God as translated in the King James Version, is so unlikely that it is simply poor grammar and some recent biblical revisions have quietly corrected it! Next, compare “day 5’s” scene to the time after the Chicxulub meteor strike 64-65Mya at the Mesozoic Era’s end- the meteor strike that led to the extinction of the dinosaurs. Sea life and birds are today recognizably the same as they were shortly after the meteor strike; and birds evolved out of the sea making Genesis 1:20 a perfect match with modern science. A scene from the Mesozoic Era’s end is biblical creation’s “day 5” and “day 5’s” scientific accuracy exceeds simple chance. All other creation story statements are accurate as well!

 

If one is to understand the biblical creation story as something other than mythology, knowledge of evolution, and of extinctions, is essential!

 

This book completely erases the distinct religious line drawn between the Bible and science. Science is the detailed reality of creation, while the biblical creation story author saw and described eight key creation scenes over the course of six days. They must, and do, agree completely.

 

Both sides of this conflict get what they claim to want. Many who are religious will be happy to know their Bible has proven to be what it claims to be, while scientists will be happy with this attempt to get negative religion off their backs and out of their classrooms! Short of some direct intervention by God, only the inventiveness of scientists and engineers will solve the many problems of energy, pollution, and disease that humanity faces today. They should have a free hand, peace of mind, and a clear moral imperative to do so.

 

Continuing, using science, reason, and their literal wording, other stories and questions are clarified such as, the Garden of Eden, the origin of Cain’s wife, and Noah’s flood (Genesis Decoded Part 2 covers Noah’s flood). The sites of the construction of Noah’s ship, its final resting place, and an ancient memorial to Noah’s family complete with human bones have been located. The entire biblically described flood event is explained.

   

Popular religioius beliefs, right or wrong, become the next generation's rigidly held traditions - the traditional beliefs of the faithful. any serious challenge to those traditional beliefs is sacrilege.

אמונות העממיות religioius, נכונות או לא נכון, הפכו מסורת בנוקשות של הדור הבא - האמונות המסורתיות של המאמינים. כל אתגר רציני לאמונות המסורתיות אלה הוא חילול קודש.


 

Δημοφιλή πεποιθήσεις religioius, σωστό ή λάθος, γίνει συγκρατούνται σταθερά τις παραδόσεις της επόμενης γενιάς - οι παραδοσιακές πεποιθήσεις των πιστών. οποιαδήποτε σοβαρή πρόκληση για τις παραδοσιακές πεποιθήσεις είναι ιεροσυλία.

 
 to éna eínai na párei pio kontá sti̱n alí̱theia , mía mustpropius Vero est ut se Una , intelligendum est de homine respectu Certum enarrans veritatem . na katanoí̱soun ti̱n prooptikí̱ tou prosó̱pou léei ti̱n alí̱theia .
 
Di̱mofilí̱ pepoithí̱seis religioius , so̱stó í̱ láthos , gínei synkratoúntai statherá tis paradóseis ti̱s epómeni̱s geniás - oi paradosiakés pepoithí̱seis to̱n pistó̱n . opoiadí̱pote sovarí̱ prókli̱si̱ gia tis paradosiakés pepoithí̱seis eínai ierosylía 
Popular religioius opiniones, bonum et malum, est in secundo rigide habuit traditiones - traditum opiniones de Christo. aliqua challenge illis traditum opinionum, sacrilegum est.veritatem.
The Approach

Chapter 1 Part 3: The approach- what type proof?

To this comparison between the creation story and the sciences, the notion of “truth always complements truth, and the truth is all that matters” is applied. It is assumed that both science and the creation story are true, and then that premise is tested.


The King James Version (KJV) of the Bible is used throughout. The book of Genesis in KJV is a direct translation from the Masoretic Text and its wording predates influence by modern science and modern religion. In addition, it is considered the only valid translation by many who are fundamentalists; those same fundamentalists who are avidly anti science. While the words and phrases of KJV have not changed, some have morphed into a modern absence of meaning. Many seem to prefer it that way.


As per the premise, the God of the Bible is assumed to have commanded the creation of everything that is physically created, and the creation story is assumed to be an exact witnessed account of creation.


For the sciences, all the sciences are assumed to be as true and accurate as those knowledgeable about them claim them to be.


The premise has proven correct.


Although a simple yet factual understanding of the creation story is easily attained, convincing a skeptical reader requires logic, reason, and proof. Since logic, reason, and proof are the venues of science, the sciences are employed broadly as the best and only evidence of the precision of every statement in the creation story. Logic, reason, and proof are offered to the satisfaction of any open-minded technical skeptic. The science used is not at all controversial among scientists. Every attempt has been made to be scientifically accurate. However, it is not possible to be religiously accurate.


Although straightforward, the creation story is enshrouded with myths and misunderstandings from many religions. For this reason, religious biblical interpretations, so many of which are contradictory, are not seriously considered.


Some Bible “believers” think contorted science (creation science) must be true since it fits their entrenched biblical myths. Other “believers” have concluded that all biblical stories are allegory and cannot be taken literally. Both are wrong!


Amidst their condemnation of science are claims in some religious circles that eventually “true” science will prove the creation story true. For those who are religious and read this humble attempt at a book, there is some unavoidable criticism. The result of the criticism and scientific analysis is what they claim to want- proof that the creation story is true.


Understanding the creation story does not require mysticism. This book considers only that which the literal wording of the creation story describes, and only in the bright light of science. It is never necessary to take a creation story statement with a “grain of salt.” The modern theological concept of multiple, and at least somewhat contradictory accounts lumped together to create the chronological creation story is completely invalid. The creation story contains no grammatical errors.


Frankly, no real god would have an erroneous, metaphorical, or even vague creation story.


Contact

PLEASE CONTACT THE AUTHOR FOR BOOK INFORMATION AT HIS EMAIL ADDRESS:XXXXXXX. FOR ORDERING INFORMATION OR OTHER PUBLISHING RELATED REASONS PLEASE CONTACT THE PUBLISHER USING THE FORM BELOW

Custom Section
Donec in vehicula augue. Sed et nisi sem, at semper dolor. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique. senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Mauris ut urna nibh, a semper. neque. Mauris ultrices tempus nisi, et porttitor nulla varius a. Ut turpis magna, feugiat quis ultrices tristique, rhoncus eu leo. In eu quam lacus. Praesent Vehicula augue. Sed et nisi sem, at semper dolor. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Mauris ut urna nibh, a semper anews sed ovref neque. Mauris ultrices tempus nisi, et porttitor nulla varius a. Ut turpis magna, feugiat quis ultrices tristique, rhoncus eu leo. In eu quam lacus. dear Praesent Donec in vehicula augue. Sed et nisi sem, at semper dolor. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Mauris ut urna nibh, a semper neque. Mauris ultrices tempus nisi, et porttitor nulla varius a. Ut turpis magna, feugiat quis ultrices tristique, rhoncus eu leo. In eu quam lacus. Praesent Vehicula augue. Sed et nisi sem, at semper dolor. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Mauris ut urna nibh, a semper anews sed ovref neque. Mauris ultrices tempus nisi, et porttitor nulla varius a. Ut turpis magna, feugiat quis ultrices tristique, rhoncus eu leo. In eu quam lacus. dear Praesent

Is The Bible Common Mythology?

Genesis Decoded

The word myth has evolved a new meaning in the last century and as per the new meaning, the Bible is classifiable as mythology. However, the word mythology strongly connotes a false story.

 

By modern definition, a myth is any ancient story whether true or false, but generally not provably true. It is the broadest of categories. It follows, by modern definition that the Bible is a collection of myths, whether true or false. For instance, one may never be able to prove as true and factual a story such as the biblical Samson story- it is common mythology by modern definition. Perhaps the only evidence that will ever exist supporting the Samson story is its inclusion in the Old Testament. Gone are the days when a story is fact simply because it is in the Bible. Can one ever regain that level of confidence in the Bible? Is the Bible history? Is the Bible indeed a revelation from God?

 

As to the inclusion of gods in ancient stories, everyone has an innate desire to believe in the supernatural. People throughout recorded time have wished for and created gods. Most people want to worship something. For many, beliefs are in cattle, crop circles, pyramids, fat statues, or ancient circular arrangements of stones. It is no wonder that others strive to overcome those innate beliefs.

Modern Judeo-Christian theologians face numerous scientific findings that are contrary to common biblical interpretations- interpretations of Genesis Chapters 1 through 11. To counter the contradictions, often with well-meaning intent, some theologians have added dignity to the term mythology for the sake of salvaging the Bible as a holy book. Many suggest that those same biblical stories somehow transcend common truth. They have found a medium ground in which they can celebrate the Bible as being a great and true book while shrugging off as irrelevant the seemingly obvious scientific contradictions. They say that the Bible is above petty scientific facts- hence the evolved definition of the word “myth.”

 

Other theologians believe Genesis is simple fiction- an ancient literary work. After all, how could it be true? Much of the confusion stems from the creation story’s interpretations- old and new. Stories such as “Earth was surrounded by shells and God put stars in one of the shells on day 4,” and “Eve was tempted by a snake to eat an apple invoking God’s punishment, “and “Adam had a wife before Eve,” etc…, sound like mythology, don’t they? Where did those stories come from? They are a direct result of ancient theological speculation and are acceptable depictions of actual Genesis stories to some in modern theology. To some, the stories define and clarify the mythology of Genesis. Never mind that the ancient depictions from theology are not biblical!

 

In the form of brief stories or Midrash, ancient theologians and historians had often attempted to add their understanding to the creation and Adam and Eve stories. Then, it would seem, if the added stories are old enough, what is obvious mythology today must truly represent each story’s true original meaning- perhaps because those ancients would surely have known better than us what Moses, the author of Genesis, really meant! What else could those writings of Moses have described if not the common beliefs of the time? Is that how it all works?

 

It is unreasonable to think that even Moses understood creation, although he understood his own wording perfectly well. His creation story wording was his best attempt to describe what he was shown concerning creation. In addition, the creation story implicitly indicates that God gave Moses some guidance with the creation story’s wording by giving an introductory narrative for each scene. Moses described the scenes of creation, but did not explain them.

 

Short of God giving them one, how could the ancients have had a creation story that is anything but obvious mythology today? Creation stories are about that which predates humanity; they could not be stories from the human experience.

 

Owing to human nature, there are many creation stories. When people ask the same question repeatedly, such as “Where did we come from? “, someone eventually obliges with an answer. However, any true, substantive, and ancient creation story, by necessity, would have come from some divine being.

 

The word myth, as used in this writing, is in reference to the false myth type. Frankly, the biblical creation story is the foundation of the Bible and most agree that if it is common mythology, the entire Bible is suspect.

 

Modern science now leaves little doubt about the Solar System’s formation and structure, and little doubt about the biology and evolution of life. Surely, we are now better equipped to recognize and understand a true creation story! Surely if the creation story has any basis in truth, modern science will now support it!

 

What is it that makes the biblical creation story stand out?