God made every herb before it was on the earth

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
4,177
726
113
#41
Actually, it does, because repetitions like "evening, morning" is a poetic language, not a scientific one.

Even ancient readers and teachers knew that.
Evening and morning are actual daily repetitions and real day markers, not poems. If someone is to narrate daily activities they did each day of the week, they'll surely repeat the daily markers as part of the narrative.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
4,177
726
113
#42
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
(Genesis 1:3-5)

this is while the earth was formless and void and the sun and moon had not yet been placed in its sky to mark days and seasons, yes?
Everything was created with man in mind. The heavens to support the Earth and the Earth to support human life- so the day and night or evening and morning are also with retrospect to what man would have called a day. God was not doing all this for himself but for man.
 
Dec 28, 2016
8,044
1,701
113
#43
It is interesting that you take one rendition and read into it something that is not there. Language is so imperfect. Here is the same verses in Young's Literal Translation:

Gen. 2:4, 5 "These are births of the heavens and of the earth in their being prepared, in the day of Jehovah God's making earth and heavens; and no shrub of the field is yet in the earth, and no herb of the field yet sprouteth, for Jehovah God hath not rained upon the earth, and a man there is not to serve the ground,"

You see it clarifies the statements to simply mean the plants weren't there yet. Read the ESV and it reads about the same as Young's. :cool:
It's just trofimus taking another jab at the word of God.
 
Dec 28, 2016
8,044
1,701
113
#44
Philo is not inspired. In fact, there are many mistakes in the early church fathers. Plus, your translation was not good, and does not reflect the consistency found in the rest of the Bible regarding the origins of creation!

You’ve already made it clear you don’t believe in the worth of the Old Testament, “except Isaiah” I believe you said.

So why even bother quoting Genesis when you don’t believe it? Or are you systematically trying to break down people’s faith? Take your apostasy elsewhere!
That's it right there!
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
7,218
3,295
113
#45
What translation do you have in mind?

Well, Philo is not inspired, neither is Augustin, Luther or YEC crowd. I just thought that its interesting to see that we do not need Darwin for thinking more about Genesis.

I never said that I think the OT is not worth. Its useful. Some books are more useful, some less. Some are better preserved, some less. Some are lost and some I think do not need to be in the OT canon.
You seem to be spiraling further and further down in unbelief about the Inspired Scriptures:

Hebrews 10:7 New King James Version (NKJV)
7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come—
In the volume of the book it is written of Me—
To do Your will, O God.’ ”
Psalm 40:7-8 New King James Version (NKJV)
7 Then I said, “Behold, I come;
In the scroll of the book it is written of me.
8 I delight to do Your will, O my God,
And Your law is within my heart.”
2 Timothy 3:16-17 New King James Version (NKJV)
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for [a]instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Please stop.
 
Dec 28, 2016
8,044
1,701
113
#46
I've attempted to quell trofimus on this while attempting to encourage him to use more Scripture. What does he do? He starts this thread to cast doubt upon the word of God again, and he's been doing this for some time in his responses.

Interestingly enough, we have another from his area who joined recently who is on the same agenda.

Hmmmm....
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
776
113
#47
I've attempted to quell trofimus on this while attempting to encourage him to use more Scripture. What does he do? He starts this thread to cast doubt upon the word of God again, and he's been doing this for some time in his responses.

Interestingly enough, we have another from his area who joined recently who is on the same agenda.

Hmmmm....
You are always brave in ad hominem attacks, but whenever I post some facts proving my point, you mysteriously disappear and never respond to that, only to return later with another general accusations.

Its not a healthy faith to believe in something that is not true, just because its in your tradition. In the era of information you must get used to the fact that more and more people will have questions not pleasant to you. We do not live in the medieval/reformation era anymore.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
4,177
726
113
#48
well we know Christ is our paschal lamb in reality. but that doesn't mean there was no passover in Egypt with literal lambs and literal blood smeared with literal hyssop on literal door jambs.
just because by allegory something teaches us of Christ doesn't mean it wasn't corporeal -- He is our light, but do photons exist?
I'm very much aware that but the way this Eden account has been narrated shows it was more spiritual than physical.

1. It is said no plant was on earth because it had not rained yet God had planted a garden on the east.
This means Eden was not part of earth and the use of direction East with a reference point (East of what?) shows that it is not physical. East as used throughout the bible is always associated with judgement and judgement with a human's heart.

East doesn't mean Iraq as some have suggested here or even Iran. Iran & Iraq are always east of something else.

2. When man fell, a Cherubim with flaming sword was put to guard the east of the garden so that man could not access the tree of life.
Why east? the man and woman should have accessed through west.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
776
113
#49
You seem to be spiraling further and further down in unbelief about the Inspired Scriptures:

Hebrews 10:7 New King James Version (NKJV)
7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come—
In the volume of the book it is written of Me—
To do Your will, O God.’ ”
Psalm 40:7-8 New King James Version (NKJV)
7 Then I said, “Behold, I come;
In the scroll of the book it is written of me.
8 I delight to do Your will, O my God,
And Your law is within my heart.”
2 Timothy 3:16-17 New King James Version (NKJV)
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for [a]instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Please stop.
Have you even compared the texts of Heb 10:7 with Psalm 40:7-8?

Can you point out some differences and explain them in your view of inspiration/preservation?

Thanks.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
10,700
1,729
113
#52
What translation do you have in mind?

Well, Philo is not inspired, neither is Augustin, Luther or YEC crowd. I just thought that its interesting to see that we do not need Darwin for thinking more about Genesis.

I never said that I think the OT is not worth. Its useful. Some books are more useful, some less. Some are better preserved, some less. Some are lost and some I think do not need to be in the OT canon.
I guess the real issue, is what translation did you get to get this off beat interpretation?Hard to tell, when you don't put it in writing. Or, did you do the translation yourself, to fit your presuppositions?

You keep saying you use the Septuagint. But, it is very much an earlier form of Koine Greek, and it is very difficult to translate. I know, we did in second year Greek with Bill Mounce. Even he decided to leave it out of the next edition of his text book, because it was so different and hard to translate. A language changes a lot in over 300 years, the difference between when the Septuagint was translated and the NT was written. Well, 400 years in the case of some John's books.

You know, like the difference between the KJV and modern editions. And you have basically said here, that you disagree with the OT canon. You can believe anything you want, but that doesn't make it right, compared to all of church history.

As for inspiration, it seems like you do not believe that at all about it the OT. You have fallen down a rabbit hole, from what I see. If you want, we can throw you a line, but if you don't want us to help you, and you are convinced you know it all, there is returning. I will be praying for you!
 
Mar 23, 2016
2,949
637
113
#53
This is the book of the generation of heaven and earth, when they were made, in the day in which the Lord God made the heaven and the earth, and every herb of the field before it was on the earth, and all the grass of the field before it sprang up, for God had not rained on the earth, and there was not a man to cultivate it.
Gen 2:4-5, Septuagint

-----------------
What does it mean that God made herbs before they were on the earth?
-----------------

"What is the object of saying, "And God made every green herb of the field, before it was upon the earth, and every grass before it had sprung up?" (#Ge 2:5). He here by these expressions intimates in enigmatical language the incorporeal species; since the expression, "before it was upon the earth," indicates the arriving at perfection of every herb, and of all seeds and trees. But as to what he says, that "before it had sprung up upon the earth," he had made every green herb, and grass, et caetera, it is plain that the incorporeal species, as being indicative of the others, were created first, in accordance with intellectual nature, which those things which are upon the earth perceptible to the outward senses were to imitate. "
Philo of Alexandria, Questions About Genesis, article 2

-----

This was written in the 1st century AD. No "evil Darwin" or "atheism" behind it.
Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens

Gen 1 describes the creation.

Gen 2 describes the generations of the heavens and the earth.

Gen 2:5 relates to Gen 1:9-10 – the seas were gathered and the dry land appeared.

Gen 2:9 relates to Gen 1:11-12 - the same day the seas were gathered and the dry land appeared, God caused the earth to bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit.

Gen 2:5 is not a standalone verse and should be understood in light of what is revealed in Gen 1. There is no discrepancy when we recall what is written in Gen 1 as we read through Gen 2.



 

Blik

Senior Member
Dec 6, 2016
1,650
459
83
#54
Or at least gives the appearance of being that old. But the Bible does not support this theory, and it is refuted within the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:11).

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.

*made = accomplished or brought forth.
The bible supports the findings by science that the earth is very old.

Here is Genesis 1:1-3 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 And the earth was waste and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep: and the Spirit of God [moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

In Hebrew it reads the world was choshek which is a spirit of wickedness. Then the Hebrew word translated as the English word light was owr, a Hebrew word meaning a spirit of truth and goodness.

On the fourth day God said: 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years. There is a completely different Hebrew word for this light of the fourth day, it means objects that create light. That is a completely different kind of light than the light created on the first day.

So God created from an earth that was waste and void, to make it an earth for us.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
9,167
2,910
113
#55
So God created from an earth that was waste and void, to make it an earth for us.
Let's stick with the KJV: 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.

Your translation is trying to change the meaning of this verse, and that is a very significant change, since you are also trying to controvert what is in the Ten Commandments.

Without form = formless = תֹ֙הוּ֙ (to·hu)
Void = empty = וָבֹ֔הוּ (va·vo·hu,) or va bohu

So what exactly does this mean? If you were a sculptor with a lump of clay in your hands before you started working on it, it would be formless and empty. And that is exactly what God had in His hand when He began with the earth. It needed to be formed into a globe and then it needed to be filled with plants and creatures.

This idea of an earth existing BEFORE this earth was created is nonsensical in view of Exodus 20:11.
 

Deade

Called of God
Dec 17, 2017
10,706
5,580
113
73
#56
Let's stick with the KJV: 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.

Your translation is trying to change the meaning of this verse, and that is a very significant change, since you are also trying to controvert what is in the Ten Commandments.

Without form = formless = תֹ֙הוּ֙ (to·hu)
Void = empty = וָבֹ֔הוּ (va·vo·hu,) or va bohu

So what exactly does this mean? If you were a sculptor with a lump of clay in your hands before you started working on it, it would be formless and empty. And that is exactly what God had in His hand when He began with the earth. It needed to be formed into a globe and then it needed to be filled with plants and creatures.

This idea of an earth existing BEFORE this earth was created is nonsensical in view of Exodus 20:11.
Tohu does not mean "without form." It means basically the same as bohu - empty and desolate. "Without form" is listed because of KJV and its modern counterparts. ASV & RV simply use the word "waste" for tohu.

Tohu = H8414
תֹּהוּ
tôhû
to'-hoo
From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.

Bohu = H922
בֹּהוּ
bôhû
bo'-hoo
From an unused root (meaning to be empty); a vacuity, that is, (superficially) an undistinguishable ruin: - emptiness, void.
 

Blik

Senior Member
Dec 6, 2016
1,650
459
83
#57
Let's stick with the KJV: 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.

Your translation is trying to change the meaning of this verse, and that is a very significant change, since you are also trying to controvert what is in the Ten Commandments.

Without form = formless = תֹ֙הוּ֙ (to·hu)
Void = empty = וָבֹ֔הוּ (va·vo·hu,) or va bohu

So what exactly does this mean? If you were a sculptor with a lump of clay in your hands before you started working on it, it would be formless and empty. And that is exactly what God had in His hand when He began with the earth. It needed to be formed into a globe and then it needed to be filled with plants and creatures.

This idea of an earth existing BEFORE this earth was created is nonsensical in view of Exodus 20:11.
What do you learn scripture from, the men of the 1500's who worked at translation or the original Hebrew scriptures were written in?

When I study history to know the ideas that were accepted by all people in at the time those wonderful men worked at the KJV. when they were killing Jews all over the world just because, I think they did a fine job but I still look for facts. The idea they could always be perfect just doesn't fly, I don't think.
 

Laish

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2016
1,560
353
83
53
#58
I know nothing of Philo other than him being some Greek-like Hellenistic philosopher Jew that died about 45 AD. They all had a tendency to overthink all things of God. I think this line says it all: "in accordance with intellectual nature "

Who cares when God created a certain plant or if it was intellectually "in His mind" before it existed. What profit could something like this be to us. All those different Greek philosophies amount to nothing except to overthink our existence and how we fit into it without God. :cool:
Philo was more than overthinking. He was trying to reconcile a Greek world view and the Jewish OT scriptures . Philo went way out there. He allegorized the whole TaNaK . Like Adam was not a real man but was a representation of human intellect, and Eve was human desire or emotions. He also believed like the Greeks that all matter preexisted creation and God . So that anything called good in the creation account must be spiritualized according to him . Philo’s view of God is just way off believing that God lacks many emotions and God’s existence is caught up in the universe in a pseudo pantheistic way .
Philo’s error is sad He bends Scripture to fit his world view instead of letting scripture affect how he sees the word.
Blessings
Bill