Genesis....Fact or fiction?

[Barrd]

It's not the first time either.

Yes....it has been pointed out to me recently that my thinking is--shall we say, unusual. The ones pointing this out seemed to think this is a bad thing.
I wonder what they would have thought of Jesus had they lived in His time? His thinking was unusual too...
And they crucified Him because of it...

Evidently, if you want to get along, you have to go along.
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't work for me.
So, I'm not following the crowd?
That really doesn't bother me at all.
I never did like crowds, anyway...

 

[Born_Again]

Yes....it has been pointed out to me recently that my thinking is--shall we say, unusual. The ones pointing this out seemed to think this is a bad thing.
I wonder what they would have thought of Jesus had they lived in His time? His thinking was unusual too...
And they crucified Him because of it...

Evidently, if you want to get along, you have to go along.
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't work for me.
So, I'm not following the crowd?
That really doesn't bother me at all.
I never did like crowds, anyway...

But your thinking isn't in line with sound doctrine. I have told you that I am not trying to change your mind. I cant do that, the Holy Spirit is the one who leads our understanding of scripture. And, you answer, more often than not, with questions. You speak almost in a philosophical aspect verses sound factual answers. I have a challenge for you. Before you answer posts, bounce them off logic. Believe it or not, even the existence of God is logical though some choose to deny the logic in it. Test your response against scripture as well. That is what so many of us on here are having a hard time grasping based on your responses. We test them against scripture and it doesn't match most of the time. Then, when we fire back, you deflect and go a completely different direction.

I have been on this site for quite some time and come to know many of the users on here as well as their doctrine. And though we have disagreed with each other (good example, check out the Eschatology forum) I have not seen this much running around and deflection. As a brother in Christ, I plead with you to consider the advice I have offered. I will pray for you.

As for OP, I have a hard time understanding how you can have so much faith in God but could not believe He could create the universe in 6 days. And, on top of that, put science above it!! As far as the science part, you then say geological studies are accurate and infallible because medical science has breakthroughs??? I have Ocean front property in Arizona if you're interested. Just as our studies on here are considered theology, science is theory as well. Hawkings for instance, all he does is propose theories and people hold it as gospel. The only factual thing about him is his super cool wheel chair that can undoubtedly go into orbit.

So lets play with science for a moment.... Do you know how much science supports creation? And how finite the evidence says things had to be? This is not something that could have been done over a very lengthy amount of time as you believe.. At the rate the universe expanded, if it had been off in timing by a hundred thousand million million one second after the big bang, it would have potentially collapsed in on its self. So, now lets look at one of the most crucial aspects of sustaining life, gravity. If the gravity of the sun were off by 10 to the 40th power, our sun would not exist and neither would we.

You mentioned evolution of viruses earlier... Yes, things evolve. Viruses evolve because we push back. We create the vaccines and the virus grows immune to it. (This is one reason I don't get a flu shot) But if evolution were to truly substantiate in the case you attempt to make, then we evolved from monkies. If we evolved from monkies, why are there still monkies?

When man does not interfere with the Earth, it is a well oiled machine and runs in harmony. Only when we interfere do things go wrong. So, this is not something that would have been created over a longer period of time as you believe. For this all to work in such precision, it had to be done in unison with each other. Everything roots in the law of causality. Everything had a cause. Even your all mighty science supports that..

Honestly, Barrd, you sound more like a confused atheist. If you wish to continue to square off with me in this arena I'll keep going. But like you said, you don't know my credentials nor my background in my studies. So, there are a few challenges for you. Notice, I did not interject any scripture. Scripture is not needed for this one. Because you don't believe creational scripture anyway.

BA

 

[River Jordan]

This thread has taken an interesting turn. If I may, I would like to rephrase the question. Do you, or do you not think God created the Earth in 6 days? If so, why? If not, why not?

Scripture-wise, Christians and Jews have been debating this question for millennia, which shows that it's not as clear-cut as fundamentalists make it seem. For example, Genesis 1 says the sun and moon weren't created until the 4th day, which calls into question the assertion of 24-hour days for at least the first 3 days. Also (and I know fundamentalists don't like this) there are two creation accounts in Genesis. The second starts at Genesis 2:4, and makes no mention of how long it all took. So one would think if time were so important, it would have warranted at least a mention in the second account. Thus, there are good scriptural reasons to consider the possibility that the days in the first creation account aren't literal 24-hour days.

Science-wise, well, simply put there's a very, very good reason why the age of the earth and universe aren't subjects of debate any more (other than refining estimates within less than 2-3%) and haven't been for a very long time. The science on this question is extremely solid. There are multiple lines of evidence from a wide variety of areas of study that converge on the same answer....the universe and earth are billions of years old. Rather than go through it all, I'll provide the following resource for anyone who's interested.

Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective

BA, your last post is disheartening for me to read. If you're going to comment on something like fields of science, at least take the time to understand them. For example...

if evolution were to truly substantiate in the case you attempt to make, then we evolved from monkies. If we evolved from monkies, why are there still monkies?

I'm going to be honest with you; that's something anti-Christians love to repeat in a mocking manner, sort of like "Hey, I'm a Christian and I'm wondering, if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes! DERP!!!" Think of it this way...if I'm descended from Germans, why are there still Germans? See how silly that sounds?


Please, please, please stop saying things like that. It reflects poorly on all of us.

 

[Born_Again]

Scripture-wise, Christians and Jews have been debating this question for millennia, which shows that it's not as clear-cut as fundamentalists make it seem. For example, Genesis 1 says the sun and moon weren't created until the 4th day, which calls into question the assertion of 24-hour days for at least the first 3 days. Also (and I know fundamentalists don't like this) there are two creation accounts in Genesis. The second starts at Genesis 2:4, and makes no mention of how long it all took. So one would think if time were so important, it would have warranted at least a mention in the second account. Thus, there are good scriptural reasons to consider the possibility that the days in the first creation account aren't literal 24-hour days.

Science-wise, well, simply put there's a very, very good reason why the age of the earth and universe aren't subjects of debate any more (other than refining estimates within less than 2-3%) and haven't been for a very long time. The science on this question is extremely solid. There are multiple lines of evidence from a wide variety of areas of study that converge on the same answer....the universe and earth are billions of years old. Rather than go through it all, I'll provide the following resource for anyone who's interested.

Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective

BA, your last post is disheartening for me to read. If you're going to comment on something like fields of science, at least take the time to understand them. For example...



I'm going to be honest with you; that's something anti-Christians love to repeat in a mocking manner, sort of like "Hey, I'm a Christian and I'm wondering, if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes! DERP!!!" Think of it this way...if I'm descended from Germans, why are there still Germans? See how silly that sounds?


Please, please, please stop saying things like that. It reflects poorly on all of us.

Sigh... River... It was the point behind it. I understand it was weak push for the monkey case. LOL But also, you cant compare ancestry to animal evolution. But you get my point. Out of respect for you, I will rephrase better going forward.

 

[River Jordan]

Out of respect for you, I will rephrase better going forward.

Thank you!

 

[StanJ]

Sigh... River... It was the point behind it. I understand it was weak push for the monkey case. LOL But also, you cant compare ancestry to animal evolution. But you get my point. Out of respect for you, I will rephrase better going forward.

Sadly some people just beg to be on one's ignore list, as they refuse to acknowledge any truth that goes against their beliefs. The giraffe is a very good example of why evolution doesn't hold any water, and yet many swallow the whole BULL to avoid the truth.

 

[StanJ]

I'm not sure at all what you mean by "deflecting".

You are saying that God must have created the universe and everything in it in six 24 hour earth time days, and I am saying that time doesn't matter.

I'm sure you KNOW what deflecting means Barrd, so false obtuseness doesn't really help.

No, you're saying He didn't, but at the same time you're also saying you accept the truth of scripture. You CAN'T do both Barrd.
I have shown irrefutable evidence that day in Gen 1 means just what it is commonly connoted to mean. THAT is truth, otherwise God would not have bothered to give us details like Gen 1 and 2. It's obvious one has to read it with faith apart from understand science.

 

[StanJ]

We know that the universe has been in existence for around 14 billion years. That is simply a fact....the same as the fact that the sun is the center of this solar system, and the earth and all the rest of the planets in this system revolve around the sun. This solar system is only one of literally zillions and zillions of such systems....it is not at the center of the universe, nor is it at the edge of it; No one knows for sure how large the universe actually is, or if it has an end at all, and no one knows how many stars it contains, or whether there is other life "out there" or not.
And God does not give us this information in the Bible.

No we don't KNOW, God knows the truth, and His word does not convey what you say you know, when in fact, you display more faith in the science of man than the WORD of God. I believe what God's word teaches and as it teaches a relatively your earth, I'll stick with that.

 

[StanJ]

We know that time did not exist until God created it....so how long did it take Him to create time?
Of course, there is no answer to that question, nor do I expect anyone to answer it.

So, when God inspired Genesis, the writer (Moses? or was this oral tradition that Moses put into words, which would mean that God had conveyed this information to someone else, who passed it on to his children, who passed it on to their children, who passed it down to....well, you get the idea. When it came down to Moses, he wrote it down? That's kinda what I think, but of course, I don't know. Any more than anyone else does, even if they do pretend to.

He created time on day one, as He created many of our physical laws of the universe. IN the BEGINNING.

Moses is the author and was inspired by God. As you don't accept what I have to say you can read the following at your leisure.
http://creation.com/did-moses-really-write-genesis

To assert your POV is the best alternative, with false humility, and then end this sentence the way you do is pretty telling as to your perspective. Very hard to have a productive conversation with this kind of attitude.

 

[StanJ]

And I will point out again....it wasn't so long ago that the church....yes, the RCC, which was the church at the time....fought bitterly against young Galileo's theory that the earth was not the center of the universe, but that it was merely one of several planets that revolved around the sun. Of course, the church "knew better" because the Bible never spoke about any other planet. He created the earth first, and then He created everything else to complement His grand achievement, and finally finished the great work with Adam....and the Greatest Story Ever Told begins.

But, as it turned out, those great theologians were wrong. Not only is the earth not the center of the universe, it actually is only one of several planets that do, indeed, revolve around the sun, which is at the center of this solar system, but also is not the center of the universe. Science....specifically, Galileo, was right.

The RCC was/is not the church. The Body of Christ is composed of TRUE believers. Their is only ONE shepherd, and He is NOT resident in the Vatican. History is replete with how bad power hungry the ancient popes were. The church was far bigger than the RCC.
Actually He finished with Eve. I've already given you info as to how far back a spherical earth was perceived, and you seem bound and determined to ignore ANY info you don't agree with or that refutes your assertions.

 

[StanJ]

Now you'd think that we Christians would have learned something from this experience. No, I'm not saying that science is automatically always right...but logic ought to tell us that the Creation story in Genesis is not an accurate blow by blow description of God's activities before, during, or after He Created the universe. Obviously, there is a lot of figurative language in the Genesis account that is not intended to be taken literally. And again, If God had given us exact technical details of just how He created the Universe, we would not have understood it, anyway.

Now, science is telling us that the universe is nearly 14 billion years old. This bit of rock we call "home" has only been around for around four and a half billion years. And we modern humans have only been around for some 150000 years or so. Now, I'm not willing to argue these numbers...Not being an expert, or having access to their techniques or their knowledge, I can't do so with any authority. But it seems pretty obvious that we've been around a good bit longer than the 6000 years or so "young earthers" insist on.

Does that mean that the Creation story in Genesis is not true? No. It only means that God gave us the information we needed....that He created the universe....in terms our tiny, finite brains could cope with. That's all it means. We don't have to abandon our faith...only adjust it a little. God created the universe....not just this one planet, but untold zillions of planets. And He did it in His Own time. Was it six days? Probably not. God is not bound by time or space, as we are. We can't begin to understand this, so our tiny, finite minds insist on placing time limits on God so that we can better grasp the reality of Creation, but it isn't necessary at all.

All we really need to know is that God is our Creator, and that He loves us. Trust Him enough for that, and leave the rest to Him.

Well as WE Christians already know, true science always supports God's word, and when it doesn't, it isn't true, despite your attempt to use ancient issues to support your modern POV, we are not fooled. You keep stating the obvious, which makes me wonder why you don't SEE the obvious?

Science may be telling you, but God is telling me and most believers, that God's word is true, and in that regard, EVERY man is a liar.
He is another link for you to read; http://creation.com/the-way-it-really-is-little-known-facts-about-radiometric-dating

You keep saying our finite human brains can't cope with the reality, and yet you keep making assertions about something you say you have no ability to discern. Don't really understand that kind of rational?

He is our creator, saviour, redeemer, and the TRUTH.

 

[River Jordan]

Sadly some people just beg to be on one's ignore list, as they refuse to acknowledge any truth that goes against their beliefs. The giraffe is a very good example of why evolution doesn't hold any water, and yet many swallow the whole BULL to avoid the truth.

Says noted giraffe and evolutionary biology expert "StanJ". You can read all about his work in this area in......um.....well....... :unsure:

 

[River Jordan]

This should be of interest to our resident giraffe and evolutionary biology expert StanJ....

How did the giraffe get its long neck? Clues now revealed by new genome sequencing

For the first time, the genomes of the giraffe and its closest living relative, the reclusive okapi of the African rainforest, have been sequenced -- revealing the first clues about the genetic changes that led to the evolution of the giraffe's exceptionally long neck and its record-holding ranking as the world's tallest land species.

An understanding of the evolutionary history of multiple species helped guide this research...

To identify genetic changes likely to be responsible for the giraffe's unique characteristics, including sprints that can reach 37 miles per hour (60 km/h), Cavener and Agaba compared the gene-coding sequences of the giraffe and the okapi to more than forty other mammals including the cow, sheep, goat, camel, and human. "Okapi's gene sequences are very similar to the giraffe's because the okapi and giraffe diverged from a common ancestor only 11-to-12 million years ago -- relatively recently on an evolution timescale," Cavener said. "In spite of this close evolutionary relationship, the okapi looks more like a zebra and it lacks the giraffe's imposing height and impressive cardiovascular capabilities. For these two reasons, Okapi's genome sequence provides a powerful screen that we have used to identify some of the giraffe's unique genetic changes."

And that understanding gave geneticists the ability to start to figure things out....

Among the research team's discoveries are that several genes known to either to regulate the development of the cardiovascular system or to control blood pressure are among the genes showing multiple signs of adaptation in the giraffe. Some of these genes control both cardiovascular development and skeletal development, suggesting the intriguing possibility that the giraffe's stature and turbocharged cardiovascular system evolved in concert through changes in a small number of genes.

The scientists also discovered genetic clues to the evolution of the giraffe's long neck and legs, which have the same number of bones as the neck and legs of humans and other mammals. "To achieve their extraordinary length, giraffe cervical vertebrae and leg bones have evolved to be greatly extended," Cavener said. "At least two genes are required -- one gene to specify the region of the skeleton to grow more and another gene to stimulate increased growth." Among the 70 genes that the team's research revealed are markedly different in the giraffe, the scientists identified genes that are known to regulate both of these functions.

Great work!

 

[ezekiel]

one day not six.

 

[lforrest]

one day not six.

OK... Since the lamb was slain from the foundation of the world I can see how that is true in a spiritual sense.

 

[kiwimac]

Is Genesis 1 to be taken literally or not?

I say yes. Corroboration will be supplied as needed.

No, it is not. It is not a scientific treatise on HOW the world came to be but WHY. We know from science that the earth is far older than 6 days. We also know that that the word 'Adam' means 'humus' or '[red] earth' while 'eve' means 'mother.'

 

[StanJ]

No, it is not. It is not a scientific treatise on HOW the world came to be but WHY. We know from science that the earth is far older than 6 days. We also know that that the word 'Adam' means 'humus' or '[red] earth' while 'eve' means 'mother.'

Let God be true and EVERY man a liar. Romans 3:4

 

[ezekiel]

Just thinking ?

We know that the waters was created first because how can the Spirit move on them yet if not created. So what are the waters? This is the fabric that all things will be laid on and not a flat earth please. The Throne of God are above the waters. Dirt (earth)was not created yet.

2 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.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

We know that from Stars comes iron and all the other minerals dirt(earth). But this has more meaning for Christ is light.


Here God makes heaven where the Angels live and flesh lives.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Now dirt, planets.Their are seas the stars move in and seas on the planets and also seas are none to be peoples, nations

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

 

[ezekiel]

Maybe it was Christ that is that light.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.


12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

Can this be why God made the heaven for Angels.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.


1 At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?
2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

I must stop here and think that God don't have days and nights and this time frame must be for other reason also

I also could not vote as you see because one of the questions should have been both plus more.

 

[Dcopymope]

Maybe it was Christ that is that light.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

Can this be why God made the heaven for Angels.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.


1 At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?
2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

I must stop here and think that God don't have days and nights and this time frame must be for other reason also

I also could not vote as you see because one of the questions should have been both plus more.

Genesis will begin to make total sense when taking the most literal interpretation. In Revelation, when it says that God will make a new heaven and earth, the term "new heaven" is in reference to a new sun, new moon and new stars. So when it says in Genesis that in the Beginning, God made the heaven and the earth, it means that on the first day, the sun, moon, stars and earth were already present. Genesis 1 is all about the creation event, and it was by Jesus Christ that all things were made who is before all things. So it makes no sense to add Jesus into the picture as the light being referred to in the creation account knowing that Jesus Christ is God and is not a created being. When it says that the spirit of God was moving upon the face of the deep, that was Jesus in action as the creator.

So when it twice states "let there be light", that is in reference to the sun. The difference between both instances is simple. when God set that great star we call the sun on fire on day one, he didn't actually let the suns rays shine on the earth. This is why it says he divided the light from darkness that was on the face of the deep, at which point he defined both as day and night. It wasn't until the fourth day that he let daylight, or the suns rays shine upon the earth. This is the most clear cut logical explanation for why the term "let there be light" appears twice, and its got nothing to do with Jesus being the light of the world.