Genesis 1, a day, and Billions of years

[NayborBear]

How about we go back from when Jesus was speaking with Nicodemus about being born from above? And then "track" this all the way back to what Lord God did on the day after He "rested?"
He created "eth Ha-Adam." Or? In Jesus' words to Nicodemus "Born from above."
Or? In modern language? The "spirit" man, or "inner" man, or "heart of hearts" man. etc.etc.etc.
This "spiritual man" is not the same as the soul of a man! (but has definite impacts concerning the soul of a man) This "spiritual man" "tends" the flesh man much the same as a farmer "tends" a garden, or fields, or tends to his livestock. Agrarian terms are used, because back in "those" days before "creature comforts" were ever incorporated by cain and his offspring? It was more readily able to be discerned and digested as to what was being said/taught/spoken to man through an Holy God, whose name IS Jealous faithful servants the Prophets!
So? The "account" of the "fall from Grace" by Eve, and then Adam? can or should be compared to "chatroom shorthand"(FWIW, Lol, Rofl, etc.etc.), as a point of reference.
Meaning this "eth-Ha-Adam" was "given unto all created souls!
Clear as "mud" now.....Right?

 

[Happy Trails]

The created Adam was at-ha-adam.

The formed Adam was ha-adam.

The aleph/tav has significant meaning.

Why does the created Adam have it, but the formed Adam does not?

 

[NayborBear]

The created Adam was at-ha-adam.

The formed Adam was ha-adam.

The aleph/tav has significant meaning.

Why does the created Adam have it, but the formed Adam does not?

Events transpire in the "unseen" that that which is seen are hard, if not folly, to understands.
In short? A Communications Breakdown.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

A: Adam's offspring blending with an existing population would make us all descendants of Adam. Moot.

But when God made humans he made a man and woman singular.

A: I don't know. it doesn't matter. Moot.

So then you do not know if any of them have sinned! We know Adam had one choice to obey or not obey and he failed. According to your hypothesis we can have untold people who are still sinless. We have no mention of them or any mention of them sinning.

A: I doubt it. They were already living in an environment that was missing the Tree of Life. Adam's ejection from the Garden put him in the same position. Moot.

And where do you get that info from? Certainly not Gods Word!

A: God created some people. Then he formed one and put him in the place where we are all trying to go. And God told the story of the man who was setting the example for Who Jesus is. You probably don't understand why Adam is the "First Adam" and Jesus is the "Last Adam." That's a different matter altogether.

In Genesis one God created or made One male and one female! that is what is wqritten. NOwhere in gods Word does it say god created many people! that is mans wored being forced into Gods Word.

A: God created some people. Then he formed one and put him in the place where we are all trying to go. And God told the story of the man who was setting the example for Who Jesus is. You probably don't understand why Adam is the "First Adam" and Jesus is the "Last Adam." That's a different matter altogether.

I am interested in hearing what you think you have gleaned from the first and last Adam monikers. But as you contend that not all humanity is in Adam, then 1 Cor. 15:22 does not apply to all men, for all men according to you are not in Adam.

When a person looks at the Bible with the "well, they ain't saved the way I think they should be saved, so they must be burning in hell," that person is only showing that the box they have built for their god is not fitting the god that wrote the Bible.

If you want to talk Hebrew grammar, I've been studying it very seriously for a while. So, before you make a singular predicate the basis for a doctrine, we might take a minute and look deeper.

salvation has always been by grace through faith. However in differing times the object of faith has been different. But today no one can be saved apart from trusting in the death and physical resurrection of Jesus for their sin debt.

well I took a year of Hebrew in College and have grammar books as well as Keil and delitzch. So I await your explanation of a plural creation of the sexes.

WellI take gods word as written for doctrine and male and female are singular- there is no room for multiple makings. Not in Hebrew, Greek, and English!

I know exactly what a straw man is. It is the irrelevant and easily rebutted point you hope is the lynchpin of my claim.

I am not sure you really do! Well restate the lynchpin of your claim and we shall see if I have rebutted it or not.

 

[Happy Trails]

Events transpire in the "unseen" that that which is seen are hard, if not folly, to understands.
In short? A Communications Breakdown.

A communication breakdown is not the reason for the difference.

Jesus said, "I am the aleph and the tav." He did NOT say He was the alpha and the omega. That distinction gives some insight to the meaning of the term.

Christianity has turned "born again" into a catch-all phrase for salvation. Jesus said we must be born again to see the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is the 1,000-year reign of the Messiah and his people on the earth.

At the end of that reign is the last resurrection. The folks that were not "the elect" will stand before the throne to be judged.

We must be resurrected/gathered to be "born again." That's what it is. You are trying to make Adam "born again" when he was never born to start with.

All the "behind the scenes" kinds of language only make concrete concepts become vague. It's one of the problems that arise when 75% of the Bible is considered irrelevant.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Ronald, you are very stubborn.

And being stubborn is not necessarily a bad thing. I have no idea where you get your claims from that place the first two days as indefinite time frames. I take my stance on the bible as written in both English and Hebrew! If the first two days are indefinite then the other five days are indefinite. that means when god specified that each "say" of creation took an evening and morning and it was a first day......, He was speaking in code and not in a way that is understood in a normal, usual common way.

 

[farouk]

Well I was simply responding to what you said in post 97. Language, construct and grammar do not justify calling the first 2 days unspecified time frames and the rest normal days.

The whole conjecture about light and darkness is just that conjecture! You imply Jesus was created because God created the light and separated it from darkness.

Tohu wa bohu in its usual usage simply means formless and empty.

The hwole precreation creation of angels and the Luciferian fall is not based on Scripture but by attempting to make deductions based on vague implications.

Hi @Ronald Nolette Some ppl see a 'gap theory' but I don't see it...

 

[Ronald Nolette]

For man read mankind or to be politically correct humankind.
.

Wrong! He would have used the p[lural form as it was more than one person made. Zakar in the singular means one male!

nə-qê-ḇāh means a single female.

Now the first instance of man in Gen. 1:27 is ha-adam, but that is also in the singular. Ha-adam is the generic term for man which can and does mean human or more closely to our age- humankind.

So when He finishes the verse He shows how he created ha-adam- He create zakar on man and ne-qe-bah one woman. That is how it is to be read as written.

 

[farouk]

A communication breakdown is not the reason for the difference.

Jesus said, "I am the aleph and the tav." He did NOT say He was the alpha and the omega. That distinction gives some insight to the meaning of the term.

Christianity has turned "born again" into a catch-all phrase for salvation. Jesus said we must be born again to see the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is the 1,000-year reign of the Messiah and his people on the earth.

At the end of that reign is the last resurrection. The folks that were not "the elect" will stand before the throne to be judged.

We must be resurrected/gathered to be "born again." That's what it is. You are trying to make Adam "born again" when he was never born to start with.

All the "behind the scenes" kinds of language only make concrete concepts become vague. It's one of the problems that arise when 75% of the Bible is considered irrelevant.

...but it does quote the Lord Jesus as being Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1...

 

[Ronald Nolette]

And you really believe that the Jews had no idea what a day was? Seriously?
Sundown to sundown was a pretty obvious distinction. They would not have had a problem with that in the lands of the Middle East.....if they had moved to the Arctic as part of the diaspora, then they might have encountered a problem.

Evening to morning is half a day......to a Jew. Evening to evening is a full day. No excuses will alter that fact. It still applies even now. Orthodox Jews are very strict about their Sabbath laws. They know when a day begins and ends.

I never said they didn't. And this was written long before Israel came to be! It is also a eupemism or idiom to mean a day! YOu must also remember that Jews considered any part of a day as a day!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Hi @Ronald Nolette Some ppl see a 'gap theory' but I don't see it...

Yes simply misunderstanding the phrase: "haya tohu va bohu"

While in teh "qal" haya can mean become, it cannot in the perfect. Also tohu wah bohu simply means an empty wasteland or area. When coupled with teh rest of teh Genesis 1 narrative we see God created teh planet empty and then we see Him filling it in.

Everytone who holds to a gap theory are moved by either a precreation rebellion or a gap for evolution and the dinosaurs to have lived.

 

[Happy Trails]

But when God made humans he made a man and woman singular.

So then you do not know if any of them have sinned! We know Adam had one choice to obey or not obey and he failed. According to your hypothesis we can have untold people who are still sinless. We have no mention of them or any mention of them sinning.

And where do you get that info from? Certainly not Gods Word!

In Genesis one God created or made One male and one female! that is what is wqritten. NOwhere in gods Word does it say god created many people! that is mans wored being forced into Gods Word.

I am interested in hearing what you think you have gleaned from the first and last Adam monikers. But as you contend that not all humanity is in Adam, then 1 Cor. 15:22 does not apply to all men, for all men according to you are not in Adam.

salvation has always been by grace through faith. However in differing times the object of faith has been different. But today no one can be saved apart from trusting in the death and physical resurrection of Jesus for their sin debt.

well I took a year of Hebrew in College and have grammar books as well as Keil and delitzch. So I await your explanation of a plural creation of the sexes.

WellI take gods word as written for doctrine and male and female are singular- there is no room for multiple makings. Not in Hebrew, Greek, and English!



I am not sure you really do! Well restate the lynchpin of your claim and we shall see if I have rebutted it or not.

I believe you told me that I could read it as "mankind." Isn't "mankind" singular?

What were the cherubim preventing Adam and Eve from getting? They were guarding the tree of life. Otherwise, A&E would have lived forever. Gen 3:22-24

I never said anything about man being, or not being, in Adam. Nor do I get what relevance there is.

Adam gave his life to save his bride.
She was deceived.
He wasn't.
Adam knew that he would die if he ate the fruit.
He did it anyway.
Jesus went to the cross knowing He would die.
He did it because He loved His bride.
He did it because He knew it was the only way to save her from her sin.

Salvation is not the issue here.

Lynchpin:
Day 6 versus after the First Sabbath.
Created versus formed.
Instructed to fill up the earth versus instructed to tend the Garden.

Adam can go out and fill up the earth, or he can tend the Garden.

He was obviously in the Garden when he ate the fruit. Otherwise, he would not have been kicked out.

 

[Happy Trails]

...but it does quote the Lord Jesus as being Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1...

Jesus wasn't running around speaking Greek. Acts 26:14

What language is Jesus speaking here?
Matthew 27:46, Mark 15:34

If a Thai person read the Bible in their language, Jesus would be "the KawKhai and the SawSeua."

No other language reveals the significance of aleph and tav and the word that is made by them.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I believe you told me that I could read it as "mankind." Isn't "mankind" singular?

Well as it does not appear in teh Hebrew- it is an irrelavent question.

I never said anything about man being, or not being, in Adam. Nor do I get what relevance there is.

Adam gave his life to save his bride.
She was deceived.
He wasn't.
Adam knew that he would die if he ate the fruit.
He did it anyway.
Jesus went to the cross knowing He would die.
He did it because He loved His bride.
He did it because He knew it was the only way to save her from her sin.

But what about all the rest of "mankind" you hypothesize God created? They had no test and failed Scripture says nothing aboutr these mythic people you say god created.

Salvation is not the issue here.

Lynchpin:
Day 6 versus after the First Sabbath.
Created versus formed.
Instructed to fill up the earth versus instructed to tend the Garden.

Adam can go out and fill up the earth, or he can tend the Garden.

He was obviously in the Garden when he ate the fruit. Otherwise, he would not have been kicked out.

So you are unable to see that if Adam had passed the test in the garden, He still could fill the earth? You know Him and Eve "knowing" each other and having kids who moved out and filled the earth as time went on? That is exactgly what happened after they failed, so what would make it not be if they had not failed?

You feel the need to have God create a whole race of unknown numbers and scatter them when the bible gives no such information.

 

[Cooper]

Wrong! He would have used the p[lural form as it was more than one person made. Zakar in the singular means one male!

nə-qê-ḇāh means a single female.

Now the first instance of man in Gen. 1:27 is ha-adam, but that is also in the singular. Ha-adam is the generic term for man which can and does mean human or more closely to our age- humankind.

So when He finishes the verse He shows how he created ha-adam- He create zakar on man and ne-qe-bah one woman. That is how it is to be read as written.

I honestly do not know where you got that from. It does not appear in Genesis 1.

So GodH430 createdH1254 (H853) manH120 in his own image,H6754 in the imageH6754 of GodH430 createdH1254 he him; maleH2145 and femaleH5347 createdH1254 he them. (Genesis 1:27 KJV+)

Genesis 1 / Hebrew - English Bible / Mechon-Mamre
.

 

[NayborBear]

A communication breakdown is not the reason for the difference.

Genesis 6:3
And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. Short hand for? Communication Breakdown!

Jesus said we must be born again to see the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is the 1,000-year reign of the Messiah and his people on the earth.

Luke 17:
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:

21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

1 Peter 2:5
Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Neither 1 of these verses declares a thousand year reign.
Yet? He who knows the end from the beginning?.....Does!

This? Is why Jesus taught in parables!

It has a lot to do with Paul's message in Romans likening us gentiles (and rightly so) as wild olive trees/branches.

 

[atpollard]

Genesis 1:27 (as God wrote it - in Hebrew) וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָֽאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָֽם׃

• (וַיִּבְרָא) bārā' = H1254 = "so created"
• (אֱלֹהִים) 'ĕlōhîm = H430 = "God"
• (אֶת־) 'ēṯ= H853 = ""
• (הָֽאָדָם) 'āḏām = H120 = "man"
• (בְּצַלְמוֹ) ṣelem = H6754 = "in his [own] image"
• (בְּצֶלֶם) ṣelem = H6754 = "in the image"
• (אֱלֹהִים) 'ĕlōhîm = H430 = "of God"
• (בָּרָא) bārā' = H1254 = "created he"
• (אֹתוֹ) 'ēṯ= H853 = "him"
• (זָכָר) zāḵār = H2145 = "male"
• (וּנְקֵבָה) nᵊqēḇâ = H5347 = "and female"
• (בָּרָא) bārā' = H1254 = "created he"
• (אֹתָֽם) 'ēṯ= H853 = "them"

[Just FYI data for the discussion.]

 

[Cooper]

Genesis 1:27 (as God wrote it - in Hebrew) וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָֽאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָֽם׃

• (וַיִּבְרָא) bārā' = H1254 = "so created"
• (אֱלֹהִים) 'ĕlōhîm = H430 = "God"
• (אֶת־) 'ēṯ= H853 = ""
• (הָֽאָדָם) 'āḏām = H120 = "man"
• (בְּצַלְמוֹ) ṣelem = H6754 = "in his [own] image"
• (בְּצֶלֶם) ṣelem = H6754 = "in the image"
• (אֱלֹהִים) 'ĕlōhîm = H430 = "of God"
• (בָּרָא) bārā' = H1254 = "created he"
• (אֹתוֹ) 'ēṯ= H853 = "him"
• (זָכָר) zāḵār = H2145 = "male"
• (וּנְקֵבָה) nᵊqēḇâ = H5347 = "and female"
• (בָּרָא) bārā' = H1254 = "created he"
• (אֹתָֽם) 'ēṯ= H853 = "them"

[Just FYI data for the discussion.]

Thank you. I am losing the will to live here. This is how better educated people than me translated it.

(CEV) So God created humans to be like himself; he made men and women.
(ERV) So God created humans in his own image. He created them to be like himself. He created them male and female.
(GNB) So God created human beings, making them to be like himself. He created them male and female,
(ISV) So God created mankind in his own image; in his own image God created them; he created them male and female.
(NLT) So God created human beings in his own image. In the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
(NRSV) So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
(NRSVA) So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

I am old enough to remember when man meant humankind in the plural, as in "Man first emerged in Africa, some two million years ago."

or as NayborBear wrote, "Genesis 6:3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

But hey-ho whatever will be will be.

 

[NayborBear]

But hey-ho whatever will be will be.

Reckon the future's not ours to see, eh Doris?

 

[Abigail]

Lots of off-topic opinions about the age of the universe/Earth on another topic, and I had a question, so time for a new topic ...

Genesis 1:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 And the earth was a formless and desolate emptiness, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness He called “night.” And there was evening and there was morning, one day.​

Please explain the phrase "And there was evening and there was morning, one day." as an indeterminate long period of time.

What does "there was evening and there was morning" mean as a concept apart from the 24-hour "day"?

This will set the tone for all of the other 6 "days" in Genesis 1 that will follow using the same literary pattern.

Maybe it's a code. Because God didn't create the sun until the 4th "day". How were days counted when the sun didn't exist until day 4?

God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning , a fourth day. Genesis 1:16-19
How were there days counted before the sun's creation?