Literal reading of Genesis 1&2

[LPT]

Bible is not a Cosmology text book but a book that explains man- how he came to be, how he fell from grace and how is reconciled back to God. So everything including the creation account is in relation to man.

The six day creation account is in relation to man- if man is created in the 6th day, there must be 1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th day. The account starts with a general statement (God created the heavens and earth) and quickly narrows down to the conditions that would make it possible for man to live and then last, man becomes the focus from that point onward. So God had man in mind when He created all those things including the heavens.

There are no 2 creation accounts, it is just one, the six days creation, Genesis 2 is already being written in the point of view of man, to bring to the fore how man failed. In genesis 2 you don't expect to see light and moon and stars because it focuses on man's responsibility.

Were the creation days 24hrs? yes, i believe they were because:

1. Each day passed as an evening and morning

2. God creates with Knowledge and wisdom and will
If you know something, how it works, then you won't take billions of years through trial and error. God already had a plan - meaning that the universe already existed in the mind of God so actualization could not take billions or millions of years.

3. 6 days account is not for the creation of heavens and earth but for making life conducive for man here on earth. The heavens and earth were already in place before day one but we also can not say they were created billions or millions of years before.

4. There's no evidence that the earth is old - scientific or not, it is speculation.

5. The concept of time.
Time is a construct of a conscious mind and without the mind, time doesn't exist. It means that if God tells as there was a beginning, we as men can not speculate anything before that, we have no right. Time is not and can not be extrapolated beyond what we experience with our minds.

I enjoyed reading your comment, and indeed it's not that big of a deal, sure 6 days is possibe or 1 day or 14.4 biilion years as well, and or like scripture says in one single breath not breaths but breath and still going today very possible any of these can be IMO.

About the evidence you mentioned, does the bible say the earth is young or is that because Man has added up equated the years in the genologuy so it must be?

 

[Noose]

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.

Your statement is misleading. Yes, Jesus is the light but He was not illuminating, we know He was flesh and bones like you and me. He also called believers the light of the world - of course not literally. Light is symbolic of truth and those of the world were called darkness by Jesus.

Matth 5:14 You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden.

 

[Noose]

I enjoyed reading your comment, and indeed it's not that big of a deal, sure 6 days is possibe or 1 day or 14.4 biilion years as well, and or like scripture says in one single breath not breaths but breath and still going today very possible any of these can be IMO.

About the evidence you mentioned, does the bible say the earth is young or is that because Man has added up equated the years in the genologuy so it must be?

I think genealogy can not be very accurate but the bible generally points to young earth.

 

[LPT]

I think genealogy can not be very accurate but the bible generally points to young earth.

Some of the times I read things about history on the Internet with a grain of salt but I have read about the 6,000 yr old earth thing, The 6,000 year age was arrived at by James Ussher, a 17th century Irish Archbishop who counted up estimates of the ages of Abraham’s family listed in the Old Testament and calculated that the creation began (on the Julian calendar) on Saturday, October 22, 4004 BC, at 6 pm. could he really dial it in down to the day year and hour huh I wonder abou that.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Your statement is misleading. Yes, Jesus is the light but He was not illuminating, we know He was flesh and bones like you and me.

Looks like you missed reading about the Transfiguration, Paul on the road to Damascus, and the first chapter of Revelation.

Jesus is now the Lord Jesus Christ and is literally and spiritually LIGHT. Believe it instead of arguing about it.

ACTS 22
6 And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.

7 And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

8 And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.

9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.

11 And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus.

12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,

13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.

14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.

What did Paul see when he saw the Just One? CHRIST AS LIGHT WHICH BLINDED HIM.

 

[Noose]

Looks like you missed reading about the Transfiguration, Paul on the road to Damascus, and the first chapter of Revelation.

Jesus is now the Lord Jesus Christ and is literally and spiritually LIGHT. Believe it instead of arguing about it.

ACTS 22
6 And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.

7 And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

8 And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.

9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.

11 And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus.

12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,

13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.

14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.

What did Paul see when he saw the Just One? CHRIST AS LIGHT WHICH BLINDED HIM.

I'm perfectly aware of that, but it still doesn't mean that God is a literal light. God appeared to Moses in the form of fire and many other place He is described as fire, it still doesn't mean He is fire.

Jesus called believers the light of the world, as a believer i have never been transfigured or appeared to Paul or anyone as a blinding light - i'm i still the light of the world? Light of the world doesn't mean a torch, we are light of the world as much as we are the salt of the world, doesn't mean that in future we shall be gloried and be pillars of salt, of course not.

In genesis, God was hovering over the surface of the deep in darkness, that's why light was the first thing created or enabled on the first day, you can not turn that to mean anything else. If God is literal illuminating light, then darkness would not have been the condition because light is a field that overcomes darkness, we can't have both at the same time.

 

[Noose]

Some of the times I read things about history on the Internet with a grain of salt but I have read about the 6,000 yr old earth thing, The 6,000 year age was arrived at by James Ussher, a 17th century Irish Archbishop who counted up estimates of the ages of Abraham’s family listed in the Old Testament and calculated that the creation began (on the Julian calendar) on Saturday, October 22, 4004 BC, at 6 pm. could he really dial it in down to the day year and hour huh I wonder abou that.

That would be a very difficult thing to do; during Joshua's time, the sun stood for about 3 hours and it affected the duration of the day somehow- i don't know if God compensated that or if there were more such incidents that were never recorded but it is very difficult to pin point the time/ day/ week/month.

 

[LPT]

That would be a very difficult thing to do; during Joshua's time, the sun stood for about 3 hours and it affected the duration of the day somehow- i don't know if God compensated that or if there were more such incidents that were never recorded but it is very difficult to pin point the time/ day/ week/month.

Very good point I like that about the day standing still.
did he subtract the leap year thing those minor adjustment to time calendars as well.

IMO the moon and earth rotations and orbits are not perfect, it's obvious of that human time calanders have to make adjustments every so often by adding a day here subtract a day there, 30 day months, 31, 29 etc. the old lunar calander has even more adjustments to do to it to keep the seasons in line with months etc. I'm not sure if anybody even uses the lunar cal. Today it's quite rudimentary indeed. but it served its purpose back in the day. If a person was to track it backwards it Could be quite challenging to do.

One could say God designed them to be perfectly imperfect, like finding a four leaf clover in a field of three.

 

[Deade]

I can't believe I read through four pages of all these suppositions, and there are many. Speculating about the makeup of time and light. Has it gotten this complicated to serve God?

Trofimus, you started all this. I think this one sentence by Deut. says it all:
Genesis 2:19 is a statement of fact, a summary/restating of how part of the Creation was accomplished/Who it was accomplished by, not a reordering of the chronological events from Chapter 1.

Then someone suggests the gap theory and you don't want to hear it. Yet you are saying you think the old earth is correct. Well, I hate to have to tell you those theories go together.

When all you Einsteins get done figuring out space-time and whether light moves, why not just pray and ask your heavenly Father how much of this you can understand. You will probably get told when you can understand God's makeup and how it relates to the universe, then you will know these things. Until then, be content looking through glass darkly.

 

[LPT]

I can't believe I read through four pages of all these suppositions, and there are many. Speculating about the makeup of time and light. Has it gotten this complicated to serve God?

Trofimus, you started all this. I think this one sentence by Deut. says it all:
Genesis 2:19 is a statement of fact, a summary/restating of how part of the Creation was accomplished/Who it was accomplished by, not a reordering of the chronological events from Chapter 1.

Then someone suggests the gap theory and you don't want to hear it. Yet you are saying you think the old earth is correct. Well, I hate to have to tell you those theories go together.

When all you Einsteins get done figuring out space-time and whether light moves, why not just pray and ask your heavenly Father how much of this you can understand. You will probably get told when you can understand God's makeup and how it relates to the universe, then you will know these things. Until then, be content looking through glass darkly.

View attachment 186697

Good one and I have we are Living in the day of the bar&circle in laymen terns the tenth day.

 

[Brad47]

I can't believe I read through four pages of all these suppositions, and there are many. Speculating about the makeup of time and light. Has it gotten this complicated to serve God?

Trofimus, you started all this. I think this one sentence by Deut. says it all:
Genesis 2:19 is a statement of fact, a summary/restating of how part of the Creation was accomplished/Who it was accomplished by, not a reordering of the chronological events from Chapter 1.

Then someone suggests the gap theory and you don't want to hear it. Yet you are saying you think the old earth is correct. Well, I hate to have to tell you those theories go together.

When all you Einsteins get done figuring out space-time and whether light moves, why not just pray and ask your heavenly Father how much of this you can understand. You will probably get told when you can understand God's makeup and how it relates to the universe, then you will know these things. Until then, be content looking through glass darkly.

View attachment 186697

I'll admit it, I don't know the exacts about it, but this has been an interesting read.

 

[rlm68]

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.

First off, the universe is not measured and aged by light, it is measured by red lines that indicate expansion. Secondly, the stars we see just within our own galaxy (yes, there are hundreds of galaxies)(how do we know?)(patterns which is a form of mathematics)(we know what our own galaxy looks like from our satellites - and through high powered telescopes we can see other galaxies that look identical to ours)...back to the stars within our own galaxy - they are literally hundred thousand miles away from the sun. They are so far away from us, when a star gives off light today, we literally are seeing it from several days ago even though we see the same star every night. Even the sun is far enough away from Pluto it takes more than a day for Pluto to see it (even though they see it every day).

And that is the beauty of earth how God created it (3rd rock from the sun). We see it literally every day, because it causes plant life and trees to grow for our benefit to live.

Look at science this way, more people do not believe in God and yet a doctor saves many of their lives through medicine, operations, biology. God does not perform miracles for all of us all of the time. Some times those weak in faith are healed by a doctor's suggestion. This ultimately means, to a degree, doctors (who are scientists and biologists) do understand the human anatomy and perform miracles through surgeries and medicines (now, I am not suggesting we want medicine, but some do need it).

But the fact, doctors who are both scientists and biologists, have knowledge that saves lives. This is the same for Astrophysicists and physicists. Many of them have enough knowledge to create theories, and some of those theories are correct.

No, they don't hold the important answers. But they do help us understand scripture out of their own ignorance and denial when we find situations within the scripture that deals things like the age of the earth being older than 6,000 years, by cleaning teeth of bones of dinosaurs and humans to know they ate plants that only grew well before Adam (there are plants that once grew on earth and no longer exist - they were destroyed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 when the earth became void and formless like Jeremiah 4: 23-27 suggests). There are trees that have age rings currently older than 6,000 years, ice rings older than 15,000 years, rock varnish older than 20,000 years. I am not suggestion millions of years old, but I am suggesting that anything we mathematically age near 50,000 years is as close to accurate as it possibly gets.

It's like Galileo stated: Mathematics is the alphabet by which God created the universe!!

 

[garee]

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

Two sources of light. The first three days the glory of God as the face of God .

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. Genesis 1:3-4

Having established a day 12 hours of light to respect the glory seen, and 12 hours of darkness to represent the presence of evil when the glory is hidden. Two day later he turns the switch on to give us the temporal witness. Sun and the moon .That would again be the glory in the new heavens and earth at the end of time . Showing us time has come to a end eternity has begun .

There were no light in the firmament of the heaven until the fourth day .

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. Genesis 1:14

 

[rlm68]

*suggesting

 

[Deuteronomy]

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 that's another, rather psychological issue, IMHO.

Hi again Trofimus, first off, I find it interesting that you disparage those who read/understand the Creation narrative to be true as written (IOW, "literal") on the one hand, while insisting that such an interpretation cannot be true on the other ... based upon what you believe to be a "literal" reading of the text

That somewhat humorous note aside, the reason why millennia of both Jewish and Christian theologians and linguistic scholars have never seen the "contradiction" that you are insisting exists (between Genesis 1:24, 26-27 & Genesis 2:19) is:

........1. because a "literal" understanding of the Hebrew text necessarily includes context (which is how we, among other things, ........determine Hebrew verb tenses*)

........2. because these linguists/theologians were not attempting to use the text for the express purpose of proving a presupposition
........like you are, a presupposition which is hardly intended in v19

*(יָצַר [yatsar] "formed" is understood as "had formed/having formed" in English in Genesis 2:19, because יָצַר is in the pluperfect tense)

........Genesis 2 (ESV)
........19 ..Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them
........to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.

Whoops, I need to go right now, so I'll have to finish my reply to you later tonight or tomorrow. Sorry about that.

~Deut

 

[Noose]

First off, the universe is not measured and aged by light, it is measured by red lines that indicate expansion. Secondly, the stars we see just within our own galaxy (yes, there are hundreds of galaxies)(how do we know?)(patterns which is a form of mathematics)(we know what our own galaxy looks like from our satellites - and through high powered telescopes we can see other galaxies that look identical to ours)...back to the stars within our own galaxy - they are literally hundred thousand miles away from the sun. They are so far away from us, when a star gives off light today, we literally are seeing it from several days ago even though we see the same star every night. Even the sun is far enough away from Pluto it takes more than a day for Pluto to see it (even though they see it every day).

And that is the beauty of earth how God created it (3rd rock from the sun). We see it literally every day, because it causes plant life and trees to grow for our benefit to live.

Look at science this way, more people do not believe in God and yet a doctor saves many of their lives through medicine, operations, biology. God does not perform miracles for all of us all of the time. Some times those weak in faith are healed by a doctor's suggestion. This ultimately means, to a degree, doctors (who are scientists and biologists) do understand the human anatomy and perform miracles through surgeries and medicines (now, I am not suggesting we want medicine, but some do need it).

But the fact, doctors who are both scientists and biologists, have knowledge that saves lives. This is the same for Astrophysicists and physicists. Many of them have enough knowledge to create theories, and some of those theories are correct.

No, they don't hold the important answers. But they do help us understand scripture out of their own ignorance and denial when we find situations within the scripture that deals things like the age of the earth being older than 6,000 years, by cleaning teeth of bones of dinosaurs and humans to know they ate plants that only grew well before Adam (there are plants that once grew on earth and no longer exist - they were destroyed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 when the earth became void and formless like Jeremiah 4: 23-27 suggests). There are trees that have age rings currently older than 6,000 years, ice rings older than 15,000 years, rock varnish older than 20,000 years. I am not suggestion millions of years old, but I am suggesting that anything we mathematically age near 50,000 years is as close to accurate as it possibly gets.

It's like Galileo stated: Mathematics is the alphabet by which God created the universe!!

Red lines could also indicate free fall rather than expansion, i'm not an expert in this but the evidence provided is not convincing.
I don't believe that what we are seeing in sky is history because i don't believe light travels- just because it has a source (point A) and is felt/seen some distance from the source (point B) doesn't mean it travels.

Light is just a field just like darkness is a field and the size or intensity of the field depends with the amount energy in the source, no one ever thinks darkness travels.

 

[Deuteronomy]

Hi again Trofimus, one last thing about "literal" readings, they normally need to be understood "in context", both Biblical and/or historic. For instance, the Bible literally says, "there is no God", several times in fact (e.g. Psalm 14:1), but do you believe for even a second that that's the meaning that the Bible intended?

Jesus also refers to Himself as a "door" and a "gate".

And while St. Paul makes it clear that we are saved by grace through faith apart from works .. Ephesians 2:8-9, he must have meant that for men alone (or we have another one of your "contradictions") because we later learn that women are actually saved through childbearing .. 1 Timothy 2:15 (if we take the words of v15 literally, that is ).

~Deut

 

[Noose]

Thanks for the thread, i've been going back to Genesis to confirm some things so i can build my case further but guess what? i'm now convinced more than ever that the earth is very young. The 6 days are actually the days that the whole universe (heavens and earth) were created.
I just discovered that the use of the word 'water(s)' is not what people think. The word water might have been used to mean space or void.

Gen 1:
1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
6And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
9And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

I think only in verse 9 do we have our H2O (water) as we know it. So the idea that the earth was submerged in water is out the window, water in verses 1/2/3/4 means space.

 

[trofimus]

That somewhat humorous note aside, the reason why millennia of both Jewish and Christian theologians and linguistic scholars have never seen the "contradiction" that you are insisting exists

Thats not true. Many of them in history saw it and tried to solve it in various ways. For example to solve problem with light before sun, some said that "light" are angels, not literal light. Etc.

For example Augustin, Clement of Alexandria, Origen did not read Gen 1 as calendar days.

"Augustine argues that the first two chapters of Genesis are written to suit the understanding of the people at that time. In order to communicate in a way that all people could understand, the creation story was told in a simpler, allegorical fashion. Augustine also believed God created the world with the capacity to develop, a view that is harmonious with biological evolution"
https://biologos.org/common-questions/biblical-interpretation/early-interpretations-of-genesis

Allegorical explanation of Genesis was quite common.

 

[Noose]

Thats not true. Many of them in history saw it and tried to solve it in various ways. For example to solve problem with light before sun, some said that "light" are angels, not literal light. Etc.

For example Augustin, Clement of Alexandria, Origen did not read Gen 1 as calendar days.

"Augustine argues that the first two chapters of Genesis are written to suit the understanding of the people at that time. In order to communicate in a way that all people could understand, the creation story was told in a simpler, allegorical fashion. Augustine also believed God created the world with the capacity to develop, a view that is harmonious with biological evolution"
https://biologos.org/common-questions/biblical-interpretation/early-interpretations-of-genesis

Allegorical explanation of Genesis was quite common.

Light MUST be the first thing in creation order and this is very scientific. Darkness is like energy in the opposite direction and for you to have anything, you must have energy that overcomes darkness and this energy is light. From light we can now get elements/atoms from which we get substance used for every other thing.