There are multiple things in the Bible that we as humans will not completely understand in this life. The Apostle Paul wrote “we see through a glass darkly”. Later in the same verse he said “now I know in part”.

As Christians, we typically believe that God will allow us to understand at a time in the future at His determination.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by TAllen01:

quote:

Originally posted by patw:
. . . If I am wrong,what have I lost? On the other hand, if I am right, what do you have to lose?. . . .

This is called Pascal's wager!

I had heard of it before someone actually presented it to me: “Why don’t you just believe? It can’t hurt.”

To me it’s such a strange idea that it’s hard to give a polite response. First, do we really believe that God is going to take that as a sincere act? “Oh, let me get this straight. You ‘believed’ because of a bet and the odds were in your favor‽ Was that truly how you thought it all worked?”
I am astounded by what some people’s idea of what true faith is.

And more important for me was my puzzlement over the thought that belief in something like that could be turned on or off like a light switch. “Lessee … believe and good thing might happen, don’t believe and bad thing might happen; I guess I’ll believe.”
It’s like the people who think that sexual orientation is a matter of choice: “Okay, now, I’m starting to have sexual urges, and as I understand it, some guys are attracted to girls and some to other boys. But mom says that being attracted to boys isn’t right, and I’m a good boy myself, so I’ll go ahead and be attracted to girls.”

I am shocked to hear someone else have a similar thought process. Sexual orientation is something you are inherently born with. I use my left-handedness as an example, and eye color. Sorry, I was born this way; I did not choose to not be able to use everyone else's scissors. Some things are just decided in the womb, so who am I to judge?

quote:

Originally posted by FHHM213:
...
A number of posts herein have characterized the Bible’s purpose as instructing one on moral living. But, that is not the overall purpose.

It is true that the Bible conveys the law of God. And that law has been consistent throughout. Sometimes, it is given in summary principled form; at other times, as very explicit, detailed regulations....This swapping of report cards is a free gift received simply by turning from our past trusting in ourselves to placing our trust instead in Jesus. We are either in Adam or in Christ.

...

The overall message of the Bible is not how to live a moral life. The real message is that none of us do. We are all hypocrites, at best, and the law demands perfection. But, the message doesn’t end with that bad news, it ends with the good news that God instead would and did provide that atoning sacrifice to ransom our lives.

....

May a similar friend invite you Sigfreund. Peace.

Again, this should in no way undercut your faith, but the Hebrew scriptures, in particular the books of the Torah, are clearly a product of the tradition of ancient Near Eastern wisdom literature, which stretches back far, far before the Hebrew scriptures themselves.

Wisdom literature is didactic in nature: its goal was to teach, often through dialogue (or monologue) and allegory. The Torah is absolutely a product of this tradition. It's job is most certainly to teach moral living. Just compare the Egyptian sebayt or the Assyrian "Poem of the Righteous Sufferer". The former teaches moral living and the latter sound suspiciously like the book of Job. Indeed, there seem to be connections between Proverbs and the Babylonian Counsels of Wisdom, though I am not expert enough in Mesopotamia to assess these claims. Regardless, if there is a connection, the aforementioned Babylonian text predates the earliest contents in Proverbs by well over a millennium.

I am no expert in Near Eastern wisdom literature, but this is something that I learned some of as it is necessary background for Greek didactic poetry, which was adapted from their eastern neighbors as the Dark Ages ended.

All wisdom literature has this common theme: instruction for moral or "proper" living, usually accompanied by inuring oneself to the suffering of life.

So, yes, the very portions of the Hebrew scriptures in discussion in this thread are absolutely a part of a literary tradition that predates the books of Moses by centuries, if not nearly two millennia.

And, secondly, you are conflating texts. We are talking about the book of Genesis, not the Bible. The Hebrew scriptures are a separate entity. Their purpose is their own and very specifically conditioned on the life and times of the Hebrew people (or those who would become them) in the 9th-ish to 3rd-ish centuries BC.

That the Christians hundreds of years later subsumed the Hebrew scriptures into their own holy book does not change the meaning of Torah, etc. within their actual historical context--namely, as part of Near Eastern wisdom literature's tradition of moral lessons.

The “Hebrew” bible (“Tanakh”) certainly does include wisdom literature. Not as much within the Torah specifically, though. The Jews organized the scriptures in three categories - the law (Torah), the prophets and the writings - which are represented by that fancy Hebrew acronym, Tanakh. Though the Christian OT uses a different sequencing and treats the minor prophets as 12 vs 1 book, the OT is translated from the Hebrew bible (mostly the Masoretic text). It’s not worthwhile to otherwise distinguish herein between the Tanakh and OT.

The common thread throughout the various books and literary styles is the covenantal structure and promises. I find it hard to believe that anyone could carefully read the OT and conclude that it is merely instruction for moral, wise living. For example, when one reaches the below passage, how do you explain God’s favorable view of David in comparison to Solomon? You would have recently read the accounts of both kings. How do you explain that statement based merely on moral living? Or, how do you explain the suffering unleashed on Job? Was Noah truly blameless as he was described? Was Abraham righteous (as described) when he basically pimped out his wife to protect himself? Proverbs sure reads like wisdom literature but how about Ecclesiastes?

I would continue, but have you actually read the Bible? The OT loudly forces us each to question our natural bent towards a law of reciprocity (the good are rewarded and the wicked are condemned). If the OT was to instruct the Jewish people on moral lessons, what was the lesson to be derived from the fact that the scriptures continuously highlight that the Jewish people failed to maintain such morality. Instead, the text informs us clearly that such perfect justice is only accomplished by God, on his timetable and through his Son - the Messiah.

1 Kings 11:6
So Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the Lord and did not wholly follow the Lord, as David his father had done.

Just to be clear, I am not arguing that the God’s Word does not command us to perfectly obey - to love him with our whole being and to love our neighbor unconditionally. Those commands have been present throughout. However, my argument is in relation to how such may ever be achieved.

With respect to “law”, we naturally insist on self-definition, self-evaluation and self-judgment. We think we do OK by ourselves, though we might need a bit of help from various deities and calves.

The overarching drama of Scripture is that we can’t and don’t obey, and thus a rescue is needed. Though we prefer to assert that Scripture provides good imperatives and that we reasonably comply, Scripture instead argues that our compliance with imperatives is only achieved in God-led response to our God-given trust in the God-provided indicative - ie that God has condescended to us, in the person of Jesus to perfectly fulfill his own law on our behalf and to bear our sin and deserved judgment.

That message is offensive to our natural sinful self. We reject it. Even as professing Christians, we struggle with that message. In fact, the historic tension that has divided the Church has related to the question of, “what makes man change?” It is hard for us to accept and trust that such is only achieved thru Christ.

This has everything to do with the OP’s initial question, as it is distinctly the plot of Gen 1-3.

quote:

Originally posted by TAllen01:

I am shocked to hear someone else have a similar thought process. Sexual orientation is something you are inherently born with. I use my left-handedness as an example, and eye color. Sorry, I was born this way; I did not choose to not be able to use everyone else's scissors. Some things are just decided in the womb, so who am I to judge?

Intersex and hermaphroditic people really throw a wrench in gender rationalization.

Thanks, Oat_Action_Man, for that discussion. “Wisdom literature” was not a term I had heard before and your explanation clarified some things about the origins of the Bibles for me.