Literal reading of Genesis 1&2

[trofimus]

The "solution" you suggest is ANYTHING but simple Hope to be able to return this evening to talk a bit more about all of this.

~Deut

Because this solution took like one short sentence, I think the description "simple" fits very well

Personal consequences of this simple solution for people who based a significant portion of their theology or worldview on literalism (YEC, flat earth, solid dome, science is conspiracy etc.) can be complex and deep, but thats another, rather psychological issue, IMHO.

 

[jimd]

From what I understand, the Hebrew word for day is yom and there are several meanings, one being age.
Then we have the first few "days" without the sun. Also , the 7th "day" is spoken of as the first six. Then in the book of Hebrew we are told this 7th "day" is today and about salvation. Bottom line is, like most opinions, no matter what our opinion is about this subject, it does not need to affect our faith unless we allow it too.

 

[Noose]

There is evidence that the earth is old, and it does not disagree with scripture. We are told of what was here "in the beginning" but we are not told when this beginning was. We are told that there was something here "in the beginning", that what was here was, in the Hebrew language was owr. That word means the opposite of good. In Hebrew it was choshak. That means it was the opposite of what is good.

Time is something very real. When Eve changed our world from what it was in the garden of Eden, it changed our world so time is part of our dimension. It is not part of the dimension of God for God is eternal or without time. Time brings on death, for even our clocks can be checked for accuracy using atomic time.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_against_a_recent_creation

https://biologos.org/common-questions/scientific-evidence/ages-of-the-earth-and-universe

Trofimus, i'm fully aware of these scientific arguments but taking them to be absolute truth is detrimental.

The concept of time in science is not true and therefore all their arguments is baseless. IMO, the entire physical science crumbles because their idea of time is wrong.

Time is not a thing or a substance that started with the big bang. Time is a measure and a measure is what the mind perceives through experience in relation to what is agreed as the standard. No one can claim that liters and kilograms started with the big bang because they are nothing more that measurements. Measurements don't exist outside a conscious mind.

Precisely, time is a rate created in the mind by observation of an object in constant movement. Meaning that without the eye to make that observation, you will not experience time. The reason God made the sun so huge and so visible and so high, so that observers on earth will experience passage of time when they see its constant movement with regards to earth.

1. A blind man does not experience time and so is a dead man
2. A man in dark room will not experience time
3. A man in a rotating room will not experience time not unless there's a stationery object so that the mind through observation can create a rate of how many times the man comes across the object.

The biblical concept of time is truth. God did not create time because itself in nothing, but He created conditions necessary for man to experience passage of time. And He said ".. the stars and the moon and the sun are for times and seasons..".
The earth was formless, so man could not experience time- God gave it a form (globe) and made it rotate constantly so that man could experience time by observing the sun (very visible from the sky).

So time - second/minute/hour/day/week/month/year is in relation to earths movement against the sun. The earth is the one and only clock that all these other clocks are set, it is the standard for time. Let nobody cheat you that atomic clock is any different or accurate, the duration called a minute or a second is already in relation to earth's movement.

Both scientific and philosophical definitions of time fail:
1. Science- Time is what a clock measures
2. Philosophy- Time is passage of events
Both right but not complete. In a dark room, the heart will beat (passage of event) but you wont experience time because you won't observe.

 

[trofimus]

Trofimus, i'm fully aware of these scientific arguments but taking them to be absolute truth is detrimental.

You said "there is no scientific evidence that the Earth is old".

There are many.

Nobody says you must take them as absolute truths. The term "evidence" has a specific meaning. Evidence points to something.

 

[CS1]

Some people read Genesis 1 and 2 literally and base various teachings on it (flat earth, solid dome, young earth). Basically, they usually come with some kind of scientific conspiracy against God to keep themselves in their faith.

I have some biblical questions about this view:

1. Gen 2:4 says it was all created in 1 day - so, was it 6x 24h days or 1 day?
2. Universe, the planet and covering waters and angels were created before the first day?
3. In Gen 1, man was created after animals, in Gen 2, man was created before animals. Literal days order does not seem to work, there.
4. In Gen 2, Adam had to name all animals and got lonely (impossible to happen in 24 hours)

lol

I often wonder how come so many miss the context of Genesis. The Book of Beginnings. God is the cause of all things we see in creation.
God is outside of time and we do not have the ability to fully understand how God did it, but the Bible is clear; God did it. Man depending on who you ask will tell you the earth is this old that old flat etc... They don't really know but they like to make people think they do know. The simplicity of Genesis causes many "intellectuals" to struggle with what they cannot know or will know.

God is the Cause God is the First Cause uncaused. God is, God spoke, and it came to pass.

 

[garee]

Hungry, your view is your opinion too. On the same level as our opinions and we can judge your opinion as you can judge ours.

if you are not willing to give it or if you want to give it but not to be judged by us, then there is no point in posting mysteriously about some secret knowledge you have, in this thread.

Its all one and the same creation. We read it literaly but understand it in two ways. Sort of like what some call the four gospels, same account, same meaning understood differently.

Genesis 1 and two presents a cyclical pattern of recapitulation a new term I am trying to understand rather than a chronological order of events. It's the same event revealed in two ways .This is in order to hide the spiritual understanding, as a parable or hidden mana from the unconverted

The same applies to Revelation 19 and 20 a cyclical pattern of recapitulation rather than a chronological order of eschatological events.

 

[Noose]

Trofimus, i'm fully aware of these scientific arguments but taking them to be absolute truth is detrimental.

The concept of time in science is not true and therefore all their arguments is baseless. IMO, the entire physical science crumbles because their idea of time is wrong.

Time is not a thing or a substance that started with the big bang. Time is a measure and a measure is what the mind perceives through experience in relation to what is agreed as the standard. No one can claim that liters and kilograms started with the big bang because they are nothing more that measurements. Measurements don't exist outside a conscious mind.

Precisely, time is a rate created in the mind by observation of an object in constant movement. Meaning that without the eye to make that observation, you will not experience time. The reason God made the sun so huge and so visible and so high, so that observers on earth will experience passage of time when they see its constant movement with regards to earth.

1. A blind man does not experience time and so is a dead man
2. A man in dark room will not experience time
3. A man in a rotating room will not experience time not unless there's a stationery object so that the mind through observation can create a rate of how many times the man comes across the object.

The biblical concept of time is truth. God did not create time because itself in nothing, but He created conditions necessary for man to experience passage of time. And He said ".. the stars and the moon and the sun are for times and seasons..".
The earth was formless, so man could not experience time- God gave it a form (globe) and made it rotate constantly so that man could experience time by observing the sun (very visible from the sky).

So time - second/minute/hour/day/week/month/year is in relation to earths movement against the sun. The earth is the one and only clock that all these other clocks are set, it is the standard for time. Let nobody cheat you that atomic clock is any different or accurate, the duration called a minute or a second is already in relation to earth's movement.

Both scientific and philosophical definitions of time fail:
1. Science- Time is what a clock measures
2. Philosophy- Time is passage of events
Both right but not complete. In a dark room, the heart will beat (passage of event) but you wont experience time because you won't observe.

Light travel argument is circular reasoning. Speed of light = 299792458 m/s, the second in this rate is already in relation to earth's movement against the sun. So, for one to get the speed of light, the earth must exist rotating constantly to give us time- you can't use the same rate for dating the earth.

Saying that the universe is 13.8 billion years old and the earth is 4.5 billion years old doesn't make sense. The light traveled at an earth 'dependent' speed for 9 billion years before the earth was fully formed.

I know most argue that right now we know the speed of light and can use it, i don't believe that light travels.

 

[trofimus]

lol

I often wonder how come so many miss the context of Genesis. The Book of Beginnings. God is the cause of all things we see in creation.
God is outside of time and we do not have the ability to fully understand how God did it, but the Bible is clear; God did it. Man depending on who you ask will tell you the earth is this old that old flat etc... They don't really know but they like to make people think they do know. The simplicity of Genesis causes many "intellectuals" to struggle with what they cannot know or will know.

God is the Cause God is the First Cause uncaused. God is, God spoke, and it came to pass.

Well my OP is directed to people who read it literally (and are, therefore, YEC or something similar) if they can explain problems I postulated.

So far, just one (FlyingDove) tried to explain one point (by secondary creation of subset of animals in Gen 2), but he did not see my next question about birds, probably. The rest is just dancing around or not actually YEC.

 

[garee]

You said "there is no scientific evidence that the Earth is old".

There are many.

Nobody says you must take them as absolute truths. The term "evidence" has a specific meaning. Evidence points to something.

The evidence of the philosophers of this world point to their theories. The evidence of God as the perfect law of God point to His law which is not subject to change like the theories of men. Here today gone tomorrow.

 

[Noose]

You said "there is no scientific evidence that the Earth is old".

There are many.

Nobody says you must take them as absolute truths. The term "evidence" has a specific meaning. Evidence points to something.

If it is not true it can't be evidence. Evidence leads to truth not just anything.

 

[Noose]

You said "there is no scientific evidence that the Earth is old".

There are many.

Nobody says you must take them as absolute truths. The term "evidence" has a specific meaning. Evidence points to something.

There is no evidence for an old earth. Everybody is trying to find the truth, on one hand you can believe God on the other hand, science says the 'truth' is that the earth is old (13 b years old). Evidence MUST confirm the 'truth' in a manner that leaves no doubt at all- the evidence that science has provided is questionable and the truth is therefore is questionable.
I'm not saying the earth is not old and i'm also not saying the earth is 6000 years old. IMO, there's no evidence for the 13.8 b year theory, not even 4.5b years.

 

[Noblemen]

I am only suggesting that in the actual Hebrew scripture (Genesis 1:1), Torah teachers teach that there was a period of life before Adam/ours called "The Beginning." They claim verse 1 of Genesis 1 indicates that God created the heaven(s)(plural) and the earth, means at this point of time referring to this entire scripture (Genesis 1:1), that creation stopped and life existed.

And then verse 2 indicates no life and the finished earth is void and under water.

So they ask, what happened that verse 1 we have life and a completed earth and verse 2 we have nothing in complete darkness?

This is where Jeremiah fills and answers that question.

Now, they do not call this a gap or gap theory. They believe it represents 2 periods God dealing with mankind. The first period of life on earth called, "The Beginning," and the second period of life on earth called, "Recreation." They still are looking for their Messiah and believe at the 6,000 year mark he will appear to the Jews. And it is through Adam's lineage their Messiah will come. This is why they believe God recreated after the period of "The Beginning," for their Messiah.

We of course know that Adam's lineage leads to the Messiah, Christ.

But nonetheless, there is no gap or gap theory, the Hebrew/Jews understand it was two (2) separate periods where God dealt with humanity!!

I have looked at this in the Dakes study bible. Makes alot of since and answers alot of questions for people. Why not, we know the earth is older than 6-7 thousand years old, Dakes calls it "preAdamite age."

 

[garee]

Light travel argument is circular reasoning. Speed of light = 299792458 m/s, the second in this rate is already in relation to earth's movement against the sun. So, for one to get the speed of light, the earth must exist rotating constantly to give us time- you can't use the same rate for dating the earth.

Saying that the universe is 13.8 billion years old and the earth is 4.5 billion years old doesn't make sense. The light traveled at an earth 'dependent' speed for 9 billion years before the earth was fully formed.

I know most argue that right now we know the speed of light and can use it, i don't believe that light travels.

Light years as philosophical term is not subject to time. A light year refers to how far a know light reaches in a year's time.

There would seem to be more than one kind of light source

God is light personified, in Him there is no darkness

When God created light on the first day it was separate from the light we receive from the Sun and Moon . On the fourth day knowing men would worship the sun as the origin .

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day .Genesis 1:14-19

In the new heavens (planets) and earth the time keepers will no more be neded ,

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. Revelation 21

The temporal time keepers will be under the feet of His new bride, the church

And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: Revelation 12:1

 

[notuptome]

Always assume that the bible is literal unless it is only understandable in the figurative.

Theories of an old earth are just theories and speculations not facts. Atheistic scientists must undermine the creation accounts to undermine the entire bile and discount the need for men to be saved.

Genesis sets forth and provides the basis every doctrine in the bible.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[PennEd]

Well my OP is directed to people who read it literally (and are, therefore, YEC or something similar) if they can explain problems I postulated.

So far, just one (FlyingDove) tried to explain one point (by secondary creation of subset of animals in Gen 2), but he did not see my next question about birds, probably. The rest is just dancing around or not actually YEC.

I don't know exactly how old the Earth is, but I haven't seen ANY reliable evidence for billions or millions of years old.

 

[Noose]

Light years as philosophical term is not subject to time. A light year refers to how far a know light reaches in a year's time.

There would seem to be more than one kind of light source

God is light personified, in Him there is no darkness

When God created light on the first day it was separate from the light we receive from the Sun and Moon . On the fourth day knowing men would worship the sun as the origin .

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day .Genesis 1:14-19

In the new heavens (planets) and earth the time keepers will no more be neded ,

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. Revelation 21

The temporal time keepers will be under the feet of His new bride, the church

And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: Revelation 12:1

IMO, the reference to God as light is symbolic to show the contrast between Him and all creation. It doesn't mean that God is a torch because in the first verse of the bible we see God hovering over the surface of the deep in darkness.

About light years- i don't believe light moves, i believe light is an energy field (just like darkness) in which darkness is overcome.

 

[garee]

IMO, the reference to God as light is symbolic to show the contrast between Him and all creation. It doesn't mean that God is a torch because in the first verse of the bible we see God hovering over the surface of the deep in darkness.

Not a contrast but literal . The first verse is not about hovering but that which he created : And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

The literal Sun which became the new source of light on day four was to be used as a time keeper till the end of time. The Sun and the mon literally will not be in the new heavens and earth .You could say a new system, not a solar system beginning on the fourth day

About light years- i don't believe light moves, i believe light is an energy field (just like darkness) in which darkness is overcome.

light years, Light does not move it is not measured by time.

The Son and the moon represent the glory of God. It is not the glory of God as Sun worshippers would have other believe.

God remains invisible separated from his visible creation

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.Revelation21:22-23

We walk by faith in respect to the eternal not seen The faith principle .And not by sight after the temporal as that seen .

A proper prescription in respect to the hermeneutics need to search out the spiritual meaning in parables as that which represents the eternal not seen......never the temporal as that seen.

The idea that if the literal makes sence don't look for the spiriutl meaning, as in searching for silver or gold as the pearl of great cost is how we can hear God not seen, and not men seen. Without parables Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God spoke not.

If we are to hear what the Spirt says to the churches we must follow His 20/20 prescription to see the, un seen eternal.

While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.2 Corithians 4:18

 

[Noose]

Not a contrast but literal . The first verse is not about hovering but that which he created : And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

The literal Sun which became the new source of light on day four was to be used as a time keeper till the end of time. The Sun and the mon literally will not be in the new heavens and earth .You could say a new system, not a solar system beginning on the fourth day



light years, Light does not move it is not measured by time.

The Son and the moon represent the glory of God. It is not the glory of God as Sun worshippers would have other believe.

God remains invisible separated from his visible creation

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.Revelation21:22-23

We walk by faith in respect to the eternal not seen The faith principle .And not by sight after the temporal as that seen .

A proper prescription in respect to the hermeneutics need to search out the spiritual meaning in parables as that which represents the eternal not seen......never the temporal as that seen.

The idea that if the literal makes sence don't look for the spiriutl meaning, as in searching for silver or gold as the pearl of great cost is how we can hear God not seen, and not men seen. Without parables Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God spoke not.

If we are to hear what the Spirt says to the churches we must follow His 20/20 prescription to see the, un seen eternal.

While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.2 Corithians 4:18

Let there be light is not the first verse, i meant this:

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters.

This means God is not literal light because He was in darkness.

 

[Nehemiah6]

This means God is not literal light because He was in darkness.

Amazing how people can misinterpret Scripture and misunderstand Bible truth.

The Bible clearly says that GOD IS LIGHT, which is to be taken literally. God is divine and ineffable light. CHRIST IS LIGHT. And when the saints are glorified they will radiate light just like the angels.

The Bible does not say that god was in darkness but that darkness was over the earth and the waters surrounding the earth initially. Big difference.

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.

 

[notuptome]

When God said let there be light the sun came into existence and the sun provided light for the day.

In the new heaven and the new earth there will be no sun but the glory of God will be the light therein and there will be no night.

For the cause of Christ
Roger