4 ms·
> You’d have to wonder how any explanation that wasn’t obviously made up by a race that lived on the Earth and understood nothing about the wider universe could
by shakna 7y ago
> You’d have to wonder how any explanation that wasn’t obviously made up by a race that lived on the Earth and understood nothing about the wider universe could get the facts so wrong.
You'd have to wonder how a scientific understanding could possibly be reflected in a poem that makes heavy use of reflective structures.
It's a poem, of a particular kind. The people it was written for would not have taken it literally. IIRC the Talmud doesn't say that it is obviously something literal. That's a more modern trend of Christianity, and even there, many sects don't.
There's problems with taking it literally. That it isn't scientifically accurate is the least of those.
- Udik 7y agoCuriously it became a poem that doesn't have to be taken literally after it was proven to be completely wrong.
- shakna 7y ago> Curiously it became a poem that doesn't have to be taken literally after it was proven to be completely wrong. Not really. The Mishnah, of the Talmud, originates from around 200CE. The first commentary on the poem treats it as a purely symbolic construction. These commentaries sum up thinking that was already common at the time, based on long oral traditions.
- AdmiralGinge 7y agoNot really, there's been scholarly argument against a literal Genesis since at least the 5th century A.D. if not before.
- mcv 7y agoBiblical Literalism is a biggest plague on modern Christianity. Nothing else has done as much damage. It drains the Bible of its real meaning, and forces Christians to choose between rejecting reality and rejecting faith. It is a relatively recent development; in the Middle Ages, the literal interpretation was only one of four levels of interpretation, and generally seen as the least important one. It's about the last 2 or 3 centuries that Biblical Literalism became big.