Creation Story

In order to persuade someone of the truth, I think it's necessary to walk in their shoes. If I were an atheist, I certainly would think that the Gen. 1 narrative was a made up story. I certainly would need information about ANE cosmology to understand why it is written that way.

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Exodus 20:11)

Had there been any gap, this statement could not possibly be true. So this corresponds exactly to the first chapter of Genesis. Those were six literal 24-hour days, measured from sunset to sunset. Hence "evening and morning" is the recurrent statement. Hebrew days are measured in this way, as seen in other passages of Scripture.

God chose a literal work week (6 days) to give man a perfect pattern for work and rest. But He also made the 7th day special, and it became a "sign" between God and Israel (Exodus 31:15-17): Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

As you will note, "for in six days" is repeated again so that there is absolutely no doubt about the creation account.

even you and i agree every so often

It's not a matter of not believing it. If one believes in God and seeks Him because of it, believing the scripture becomes something desirable. Yet in the face of the knowledge of the universe that science and technology has provided, the Gen. 1 narrative appears contradictory to Paul's statement that God's eternal nature can be seen in creation.

So the question becomes, can we believe what we see, or do we have to close our eyes and minds to what we observe before us in order to believe God? There has to be an explanation as to why the Gen. 1 narrative is contrary to what is observed in nature. In fact, it's the very contention that is perceived between science and Christianity.

The point is that Ancient Near East cosmology can sufficiently explain why the Gen. 1 narrative is written that way. God can communicate His eternal nature through the misunderstandings of fallible people.

Are you Greek?

Ty. Agreed. The ancient cosmology and firmament as a solid dome over the sky was a worldwide view held, from Native American to the continent of Africa to the ANE. I think that God had communicated despite the ANE cosmology. I don’t see God changing the Israelites understanding of cosmology or biology. But, despite it he was able to communicate certain theological truths through it.

Cosmology ancient or modern can have God as creator, sustainer, owner.

FreeGrace2 said:
Could you please explain where in the 10 commandments refuted the time gap in Gen 1:1,2? I wasn't aware of that. Thanks.

ignore post 67.

Corrected

FreeGrace2 said:
Could you please explain where in the 10 commandments refuted the time gap in Gen 1:1,2? I wasn't aware of that. Thanks.
OK, we'll stop here for a bit. The Hebrew for "made" in Ex 20 is asah, which means to make out of existing materials. The Hebrew for "create" in Gen 1:1 is bara, which means to make from nothing, or ex nihilio. Other verses tell us that God spoke the universe into existence, which affirms Gen 1:1. So Ex 20:11 refers to the restoration of earth from Gen 1:2ff.

No, as just explained.

Agreed. God took 6 literal days to restore the planet.

Not creation, but a restoration.

We know this from Gen 1:2 and the PROPER translation of key words.

Traditional:
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Hebrew doesn't have a conjuction for "but". The word is used either way, depending on context. The Septuigant translates the conjunction as "but", which is a conjunction of contrast.

The "was" is a verb meaning "to exist, or become". It is used in various forms 3560 times in the OT. When comparing just the exact form as in Gen 1:2, there are 111 occurrences. 60% of those occurrences are translated as either "become" or "became", and only 6% as "was".

The blue words are "tohu", translated elsewhere as "wasteland" elsewhere, and "wabohu" translated as uninhabited.

So, v.2 actually says "but the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland".

All this can be found on biblehub.com. Start with the "interlinear" tab and search for all the verses where the Hebrew for "was" is found.

btw, the traditional translation creates a conflict with isa 45:18.

1:2 - and the earth was "tohu wabohu"

Isa 45:18 God didn't create the earth "tohu".

So which is it? The traditional says God created the earth tohu. But Isa 45:18 says He didn't.

When the correct translation is used, there is no conflict with Isa 45:18.

1:2 corrected: but the earth became tohu
Isa 45:18 God didn't create the earth tohu

I take the first sentence in the Bible to be an absolute and unquestionable truth. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth. Can I prove it - No.

The rest of the Bible hangs on this one truth. If God can create life from no life, then every other miracle like raising the dead, healing the sick, the virgin birth are all minor miracles by comparison. I won't argue with anyone's understanding of the six days of creation. Other than, how does it inspire me?

I would need more info to be persuaded of your idea. For example, Isa. 45:18 doesn't mean what you're making it to mean, IMO. It simply means "God created the world to be inhabited." It doesn't in any way, shape, or form say or imply that WHEN God created the Earth that He created LIFE on it AT THE SAME TIME. It appears to me that you are ASSUMING that.

In Isa. 45:18, it's a statement of purpose, meaning the purpose to have the world inhabited was ultimately fulfilled. To that, the fact that the world is inhabited is proof of it. In context, the point is that when God speaks (through the prophets), He will cause it to happen. So then, to claim that the Earth was created WITH LIFE IN IT in an initial creation prior to the current one, is pure conjecture, and Isa. 45:18 cannot be used to support it, because that idea is foreign to the context of Isa. 45:18.

Your strongest argument IMO appears to be the translation of the term "was" should be "became." However, I still think that the conclusion about it is on shaky ground. It's not a good idea to develop a dogma based on a single word in scripture. Therefore, IMO if you want to persuade people of your idea, you'll need to provide a lot more info.

Isa 45:18 has absolutely nothing to do with this. But the Ten Commandments are final and binding. The rest of your arguments have no merit.

No problem. I gave the information on how I determined the correct translation.

English Standard Version
For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!): “I am the LORD, and there is no other.

New American Standard Bible
For this is what the LORD says, He who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it and did not create it as a waste place, but formed it to be inhabited): “I am the LORD, and there is no one else.

American Standard Version
For thus saith Jehovah that created the heavens, the God that formed the earth and made it, that established it and created it not a waste, that formed it to be inhabited: I am Jehovah; and there is none else.

JPS Tanakh 1917
For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens, He is God; That formed the earth and made it, He established it, He created it not a waste, He formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD, and there is none else.

New Revised Standard Version
For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it a chaos, he formed it to be inhabited!): I am the LORD, and there is no other.

New Heart English Bible
For thus says the LORD who created the heavens, the God who formed the earth and made it, who established it and did not create it a waste, who formed it to be inhabited: "I am the LORD, and there is no other.

World English Bible
For thus says Yahweh who created the heavens, the God who formed the earth and made it, who established it and didn't create it a waste, who formed it to be inhabited: "I am Yahweh; and there is no other.

Yes, there are translations like this:

King James Bible
For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

The "in vain" in the Hebrew is "tohu", same word in Gen 1:2.

And some translations add "to be a waste", but the ESV and NASB don't include "to be" in their translations.

It is a statement of fact, and yes there is a purpose. But the FACT is this:

Gen 1:2 says "and the earth was (created) "tohu", in the traditional rendering, and Isa 45:18 says "earth was not created "tohu".

So that's a problem. When the "and" and "was" are corrected, there is no problem. The earth was not created "tohu" but BECAME "tohu".

All we know is that Adam and the woman were the first humans on the planet and yet, they did multiply.

I haven't said that. In fact, the Bible says NOTHING about what happened before the earth became "tohu". What we do know is that God restored the earth in 6 literal days.

Speaking of "restore", let's examine Her 11:3.
By faith we understand that the universe was created (katartizo) by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

The Greek "katartizo" is properly translated as "restored" in Gal 6:1 - Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore (kataartizo)that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted.

This aligns with what the disciples did with nets.

Matt 4:21 - And going on from there he saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending (katartizo) their nets, and he called them.

Mark 1:19 - And going on a little farther, he saw James the son of Zebedee and John his brother, who were in their boat mending (kataartizo)the nets.

To 'mend' something is akin to restoring it. That's the basic meaning of the word. And Heb 11:3 uses that word for what God did to the universe.

The text plainly says that "earth was not created "tohu". And we know what the word means.

But even if we didn't know the meaning of "tohu", it is clear that Gen 1:2 (traditional) and Isa 45:18 say the opposite.

What do you mean by "dogma"? All I did is share how key words are used elsewhere in the OT, which anyone can do.

For one thing, there is NO context to v.2, except v.1 which is obviously original creation. Then, v.2 begins with a conjunction of CONTRAST ("but" in the Septuigant) "the earth BECAME tohu". So, in order to properly understand what Moses meant, all we can do is examine how these key words are rendered in the rest of the OT, and a different picture emerges from the traditional rendering of v.2.

I'm not trying to persuade anyone. I have provided evidence of a different meaning of v.2, based SOLELY on how the key Hebrew words were translated elsewhere in the OT.

Those with an open mind may see the point and change their mind. Those with a closed mind won't be changed by any facts.

Thank you for your opinion. But it has everything to do with it.

The verse says "the earth was NOT created (bara) tohu." The traditional Gen 1:2 says "and the earth was (created) tohu".

And I showed that the word "made" isn't about CREATION in Gen 1:1. In v.1 we have "bara", but Ex 20:11 uses "asah". Not the same.

OK, thanks for admitting having a closed mind to FACTS. That's ok.