Depends on what you mean by “the framework”. If all you mean is that there is a beginning to the universe, that doesn’t seem like much of a framework. And much else in Genesis 1 is just wrong. I assume you consider all that wrongness to be merely “granular details”. But when you remove those granular details, what is left that is supposed to fit “what we now know”?
It’s almost entirely true. Not many Jews became Christians; most of them stayed Jews. (Probably not really true; conversions have happened throughout history, generally for economic or social reasons, sometimes forced. And of course many Jews probably became muslims for similar reasons. But the point is that Genesis was written by and for the Jews, plenty of whom remain Jews.)
Considering that the people Genesis was “written by” are all dead, that’s an interesting observation. (Yes, I understand what you are saying—but it is also arguable that the people Genesis was “written for” also includes Gentiles.)
This is an important point. I don’t agree with how you have framed it, personally, but you are certainly fair to present it as a challenge.
The central message is quite simple to comprehend. I stated it above. We make mistakes and we do things that are wrong (everyone understands this). God is holy (whether or not you agree, this is readily comprehensible.) We can become right with God by being forgiven. Accepting forgiveness is a choice.
I struggle with this, too. But there are two points to consider. First, how many have gone to their graves knowing exactly what God meant? And, secondly, if God is righteous, we can imagine that, if someone truly had no idea, that they may not be judged. There are many opinions regarding this issue, but this is how I deal with it.
The reason that it is not true is that we believe that, though the scripture was said to be authored by Moses, to his people, it was intended to be for all people as well.
Not at all. Jesus and Paul both considered the Tanakh to be written for the edification of all. And “There is neither Jew nor Gentile” is not ironic. Dividing mankind into people groups is not always helpful.
False. I could cite many examples from before Paul, such as Philip explaining an Isaiah passage to the Ethiopian eunuch, an important court official to Queen Candace. (Yes, both the Torah and the Neviʾim [the Prophets] are part of the Tanakh.)
Note that it’s been claimed on occasion that not only was the original bible inspired, but so were various of its translators. God can’t preserve clarity through translation?
And what about those people who’ve heard the message of the Bible, but said “I don’t believe that”, then went about living a perfectly “good” life, by the standard of most people? What’s their judgement?
Firstly, absolute clarity in translation is a goal which I liken to an asymptotic function. With great effort one can get close but—because language translation is never a matter of mathematical equivalence—there will often be nuances which will be difficult to capture in the target language. Moreover, cultural context in the source language can make absolute clarity even more challenging.
Secondly, the lack of clarity was a complaint the disciples brought to Jesus. They wondered why Jesus taught in hard to understand parables. Jesus explained that the mysteries of the Kingdom are revealed only to those God had chosen. This is a big topic of its own.The Bible explains (e.g, in Job and the Apostle Paul’s writings) are due to an omniscient God communicating with the limited minds of people. And as Paul wrote, “We see through a glass but darkly.” Paul said that true clarity would be achieved in eternity once sanctification is complete and “face-to-face knowledge” of Jesus Christ would be achieved.
Parents do not always communicate clarity to their children. That is often intentional. Are young children necessarily ready for clarity on every topic?
The Bible says that nobody lives “a perfectly ‘good’ life.” Moreover, the Bible doesn’t regard “the standard of most people” as the most suitable standard of judgement.
Your question also relates to the topic of whether Biblical judgment is based upon the achievement of some relative level of “goodness” or something else.
I’ve spent a lifetime making much sense of it. And I know of lots of people who “can make sense of it”. So I don’t agree with the “nobody” of your claim.
Obviously, “never means what it says” is simply rhetorical hyperbole.
As to “people constantly have to reevaluate their understanding in light of it contradicting the real world”, I could say the same of evolutionary biology. As additional data comes to light, we must reevaluate our understanding of evolutionary processes in the light of that “real world”. Do you casually rejective scientific data using the same dismissive reasoning?