# Arguments against myth



## LeeJUk (Oct 15, 2011)

Well as many of you will know I go to a liberal divinity school. It's quite difficult and I don't really have the resources to respond on certain questions. I have tried to read up on this but I haven't found much satisfactory answers. 

What would you say to argument that

Genesis is myth, myth-history, poetic, primitive near east understandings of why things are? Yet inspired by God [in some loose unauthoritative sense].

For some specific examples:

Tower of babel - Primitive explaination as to why there are many people spread over all the earth with different languages instead of just one. 

Lot's daughters laying with him - At the end it explains:
Gen 19:36 Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father. 
Gen 19:37 The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab. He is the father of the Moabites to this day. 
Gen 19:38 The younger also bore a son and called his name Ben-ammi. He is the father of the Ammonites to this day.

The Israelites are embarrassing the Moabites/Ammonites who were their local enemies at the time of writing or explaining why these tribes are evil/polytheists and enemies of the true people of God. 


How would I argue against this without saying "Oh well...I have faith that this is history"?


----------



## Peairtach (Oct 15, 2011)

Well in the case of Adam and Eve, Moses gives the location of Eden in relation to certain rivers and places. It may be difficult for archaeologists to find it now, what with various events, including the Flood, affecting the topography. See unbelieving archaeologist David Rohl's attempt in "Legend".

If Eden was a mythic place like Trumpton, invented by Moses or previous historians to tell a good and moral tale, then why did Moses seek to give its location?

Of course the story of the Fall is a story with moral lessons, but it makes a complete difference if it is historical or not.

Re Adam and Eve, they are everywhere in Scripture accepted as historical persons who were the progenitors of the human race, and of our Lord. Check out the genealogies in I Chronicles, Luke, and elsewhere.

Schaeffer's "Genesis in Space and Time" is worth getting on this:
Genesis in Space and Time Bible Commentary for Layman: Amazon.co.uk: Francis A. Schaeffer: Books

Also read Calvin on the first few chapters of Genesis, and check out the other Scriptural references to "Eden".

If "the serpent" or "the Serpent" is a figurative way of speaking about Satan's serpentine nature or character, that does not make the story of the Fall unhistorical. In Ezekiel and Revelation, other angelic creatures, the cherubim, are revealed in vision in terms of earthly creatures, in order to teach us about them - see Patrick Farbairn's "Typology".

The main reason why Liberals and "Evangelicals" view Genesis as myth is because they've already accepted human evolution from ape-like creatures, which is the real secular humanistic myth. We have to choose which story we are going believe is myth, the biblical story, or the secular humanist story.

Many of them, in all consistency, go on to believe the Gospels are myth.


----------



## LeeJUk (Oct 15, 2011)

OK thanks Richard.

How about the other two examples, those are a bit more tricky in my opinion than Adam and Eve.


----------



## lynnie (Oct 15, 2011)

I really liked the book " Secrets of the Lost Races" by a 7th day adventist.

It is an examination of archeological ooparts ( out of place items) that reveal highly advanced technology in ancient civilizations pre and post flood. I agree with the presupposition that mankind before Noah was very smart, very advanced (electricity, nuclear weapons), and this continued after for a while, much was lost and has been regained in modern times, but not all.

Liberals and even Christians buy into modern evolutionary theory that we have progressed from primitive ancestors. Actually, quite the opposite.

Personally, I would not even try to argue, I just mention the book for your own enjoyment and edification. Myth? Ha!

Amazon.com: Secrets of the Lost Races: New Discoveries of Advanced Technology in Ancient Civilizations (9781572581982): Rene Noorbergen: Books



Noorbergen's classic text on archeological anomalies that confound the established picture of human prehistory and suggest that an advanced global civilization thrives on this planet in the remote past is a treasure trove of information. In that respect, it is similar to the more recent "Forbidden archaeology" by Cremo and Thompson, and to works by Graham Hancock. The main difference is that Noorbergen accepts as evidence biblical accounts of a flood, and of a line of (very long-lived) patriarchs descended from the survivors of that flood. Even though I do not believe in the historical veracity of the biblical texts, his case did not seem to be without merit; still, non-christian readers will probably find that part of the book lacking in credibility.
Luckily, the remainder of the book relies more on archeological than scriptural evidence. Highlights include chapter 4, which discusses evidence for "Advanced Aviation in Prehistoric Times", and chapter 5, "Nuclear Warfare Among the "Primitives". Noorbergen's claim of nuclear warfare in prehistoric times may seem preposterous to even an open-minded reader, and his interpretation of ancient texts to be the product of an overactive imagination, but as a matter of fact, it is backed up by solid physical evidence......


----------



## rbcbob (Oct 15, 2011)

Hebrews 11:3 Credo ut intelligam -By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God. The Christian presupposes that all that God has revealed is true.


----------



## Peairtach (Oct 15, 2011)

> Tower of babel - Primitive explaination as to why there are many people spread over all the earth with different languages instead of just one.



There is evidence external to the Bible for Babel. You just have to look around the internet for it, or find appropriate books.

Of course our faith is in God's Word, not in external evidence, but it can be shown that even on the presuppositions and demands of those who would reject God's Word as evidence, there is evidence external to God's Word, but they won't listen to Moses and the Prophets even if someone were to rise from the dead and tell them (Luke 16:31). But God's Spirit can use His Word and sound argumentation to change them.

They are without excuse in their prejudice against God's Word. They have prejudged the Bible and rejected it.



> Tower of babel - Primitive explaination as to why there are many people spread over all the earth with different languages instead of just one.



Can those who assert this prove what they are saying or are they exercising faith in their naturalistic presuppositions, and their snooty despite for "primitive" peoples?

Tower of Babel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Even on the Wikipedia page alone, there are brief accounts of similar stories external to the Bible, as there are about the Flood. 

Modern naturalistic Man thinks he knows better than his ancestors who were closer to these events than he is. It's just atheistic prejudice, plain and simple.



> Lot's daughters laying with him - At the end it explains:
> Gen 19:36 Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father.
> Gen 19:37 The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab. He is the father of the Moabites to this day.
> Gen 19:38 The younger also bore a son and called his name Ben-ammi. He is the father of the Ammonites to this day.
> ...



What explanation do those that prejudge Scripture have for the origin of the Moabites and Ammonites? The story would embarrass the Israelites somewhat too, since Lot was Abraham's nephew.

Those who presume the Bible is wrong on something without even having evidence of a reason, reveal their deep antipathy to God's Word.

If you want to have further reasons on this subject other than just saying that "Because the Bible tells me so", although ultimately that must be the case because anything external to Scripture is less sure than God's Word, then search and read widely and deeply on these subjects.

_Those who are prejudiced against the Bible won't point you in the direction of any material that might be shown to tally with the Bible._


----------



## JennyG (Oct 15, 2011)

lynnie said:


> Personally, I would not even try to argue, I just mention the book for your own enjoyment and edification. Myth? Ha!



I agree. Be confident of the truth in your own mind and never say different. Also collect up as much factual data as you can. 
But don't waste your time arguing unless there's reason to believe someone has an open mind. Most liberals haven't, and typically in the UK will listen with a polite face, then be full of contempt behind your back :-S 
Books like the one Lynnie mentions (and it's *much* cheaper on amazon UK) can be a great read though, and are full of intriguing nuggets of info that make good icebreakers, with which to chip away at the monolith of invincible ignorance. I know one unbelieving, but very intelligent young man, about your age, who found Graham Hancock's Fingerprints of the gods impossible to put down.
Some books in that general area are so wacky as to bring them all into disrepute..- but what can you expect, when mainstream academics are all sworn to ignore contrary evidence and defend evolution to the last gasp??

Lynnie's last paragraph is from an amazon review. I don't think she'd say _I do not believe in the historical veracity of the biblical texts_ herself...


----------



## py3ak (Oct 15, 2011)

This does not relate to Genesis precisely, but it is a good expose of the fact that unquestioned yet highly questionable assumptions lie behind a great deal of the rejection of the Bible's historical value.

http://orthodox-web.tripod.com/papers/fern_seed.html


----------



## TimV (Oct 15, 2011)

Why pick on Moab and Ammon? Edom and Syria treated Israel worse, but there was not ban on marriages between Edomites and Syrians, only Moabites and Ammonites.

Sure, they could have made it up, but why the consistency??? And why to this day do Jordanians claim decent from Lot?


----------

