God made every herb before it was on the earth

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.

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.

It's just trofimus taking another jab at the word of God.

That's it right there!

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.

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.

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.

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.

I wish the "insects" bucket would of been used less! Out here in the swamp region the air can get mosquitoish!

Unfortunately.

Im a caveman from another era. Would definately enjoy that era more.

Lets go-a heresy huntin' lads!

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!

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.

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.

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.

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