Genesis Clues

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Stan, Aug 14, 2012.

  1. The Genesis narrative, has a few stops and starts in the first two chapters. It goes from sweeping to more and more detailed.
    Gen 1:1, then Gen 1:2 to Gen 2:3 for the days. Then Gen 2:4 reverts back to Gen 1:26, with more detail, and concludes in Gen 2:25. The chronological narrative then picks up in Gen 3:1 and continues from there. Gen 1:2-3 is day one with God having created light, Hebrew word is אוֹר
    which has many connotations, but Gesenius's Lexicon refers to it as "light everywhere, diffused, such as daylight or sunlight." Hence God created the sun right after he created the earth, still on day one.
    Now look at day two, v6-8, God makes our atmosphere. NOT as we have today, but as He originally created it on that day, it was the planet covered with water(v2), then God put the atmosphere between a layer of the water and pushed THAT layer up so it was earth, surrounded by water, surrounded by atmosphere(vault/expanse/sky), surround by water. From a side view it looked like a five ring bullseye with the fiery core being the center and the outer envelope of water being the fifth ring.
    Then we get to v16, where God creates two great lights. The Hebrew word here is מָאוֹר and means "luminary", so what was it if the sun and planets were already created? At the end of v16, it says, "He also made the stars." We know the sun is a star so is this another flashback to v4 to provide more detail? I don't think so because it clearly says this is day 4, not day one. It also talks about a second great light, which most people will probably agree is the moon, except we KNOW today that the moon is NOT a light. We had to have sunlight already as vegetation was growing in vs11-13, which is the 3rd day. Or did it? If God created a fully mature earth, then He could create the vegetation one day and the light the next day. So what did God create on the 4th day?
    I believe that God created refraction in the water to act a certain way, and as we orbited the sun and the earth revolved, that refraction created light that was strong during a certain period of the day so fully illuminate the part of the world it was near, and at night the diffusion was much less, but still enough for people to see a little bit. The stars is another matter and I have no idea if God just put small ones in the actual sky, or if they we viewable through the water that surrounded the earth. It will be neat when I meet Jesus and ask him though.
  2. Why is it so important to claim to know how he did it?

    I think the mystery is better than fighting over who's speculation is the best. There is more faith required to admit its beyond you, than there is in all of the research to understand the details of something that isn't even the topic, such as abiogenesis, creation etc....
  3. There is an excellent organisation which studies creation science. I will get the link and send it to you. They have some amazing theories which actually support the Biblical account of creation. It is very interesting to learn more about creation.

    God bless
  4. Actually when we look at the creation story, it is very short. God simply did not put a lot of information in it.

    IMHO, me thinks it was for a reason. The Bible is not a book of psycology, but has psycology in it.
    It is not a math book but has math in it. It is not a song book but has songs in it.

    It is not a book about creation but contains what God wanted us to know. I know that sounds simplistic but sometimes we tend to over think some things. The most imortant thing about the Bible is God's relationship to man and how man can have fellowship with God.
  5. One I am aware of is Hugh Ross and his group, "Reasons To Believe"

    His writings are biblically sound (I believe) and gives an in depth look at creation science. I read The Creator and the Cosmos a long time ago. Good stuff, even for the non-scientist type.
  6. ICR.ORG

    If you need to justify Genesis, you miss the message though.
  7. Yup, the Bible is not a science book but it does contain some interesting science facts which were only recently discovered.

    1) The bible tells us the world rests on nothing - until quite recently men thought the world was flat. Some believed is was suspended on some kind of super structure. Some religions believed it was supported by elephants who rode on a giant sea turtle.
    2) The Bible talks about the springs of the deep. Only recently have they discovered that there are huge water vents deep below the seabed.

    There are many more but the Bible is about God's redemptive plan for mankind. I think He just threw in some of these amazing scientific facts to keep us humble.
  8. One of the problems for creation theology has been the vast ages suggested by the vast distances to the stars and galaxies. How can the Bible teach a relatively recent creation when science tell us that some galaxies are billions of light years away?
    NASA is actually working on a faster than light drive that would be based on an application of the special relativity theory. If the theory is sound, then it is feasible that light from distant galaxies could have made the trip here in a matter of days to years, or, they could have been created locally and spread (stretched) out across the heavens. Visit if you are interested. So, to my puny intellect, it seems possible that the Stars could have been spread out after creation without leaving blanks in the sky so to speak. I'm trying to keep this that even I can understand it :LOL:
  9. How old was Adam when he was created?

  10. The issue is, do you believe God's account in His Word (He was there), or science(they weren't there)?
    I believe God and as such interpret everything within that context.

    Think Sherlock Holmes.
  11. Don't know, but I'll guess around 25. They were both fully mature adults.
  12. It's a trick question. He appeared to be a grown, mature man. But he was only a few seconds old.

    If God can make Adam appear to be old, why not an entire universe.
  13. That I posted an argument from the other side was clear most. There exists a field of endevour known as apologetics.
    And are you so critical of inuendo, and lack of contextual cognizance?
  14. You got me. (y)
  15. There are those antagonistic to theism who argue that would make God a liar and a deceiver, based on the idea of a young creation.

    Stan, that is not what I believe...just being aware of some objections raised by atheists.

    As for Adam's age, he must have been youngish......look at the names he gave some of the animals.:)
  16. WHO is the other side? You?
    I'm critical of people who ONLY want to cause controversy and who have no actual stance on any given subject.

  17. I can handle atheists calvin... I do it all the time.
    What I really don't understand, is your need to play Devil's advocate all the time?
  18. Then avoid your own posts at all cost! The very traits you condemn in others can be found in you.
    You can blow raspberries at me all day long if you like, but please heed your own admonitions and keep to commenting on context and stay on the thread topic lest you be numbered amongst the hypocrites.
  19. Stan, if you have a problem with me, is your problem. Don't make it every one else's, PM me if you like, if you are determined to get personal then that would be the place to go.

Share This Page