Hello all. I wanted to invite discussion about this question I have regarding the "creation account." I have approached this issue from a Young Earth and an Old Earth perspective, and also am questioning whether neither suffice. Is God concealing mystery in the account while not attempting to describe the literal account at all?
To understand why I am questioning the latter, please take a look at a few strange points of the creation account that I think many people gloss over, and I did the same in my readings as well.
1) God said let there be light. God IS light, so he was obviously not talking about himself coming into being.
2) He divided light from dark and the light he called day (yom) and the dark he called night, and the evening and the morning (together) were the first day (yom). Very interesting that you have YOM (day) represented by the light as distinguished from the dark, but then you also have the COMBINATION of day and night as the first day. In other words: day (yom) + night = yom (day). So, is a day 12 hours? Or 24 hours, or millions of years?
So already we have in interesting use of the word YOM as having distinct meanings indicating differing time frames.
But here is where it gets really interesting:
3) On the forth "DAY" God appears to have made the sun, moon and stars for the express purpose of measuring "days (yom), months and years" AND "to separate the day (yom) from the night" Huh? I thought day and night were already separated on the first day?
Hello?
So, from day four onward, God obviously means for man to use the sun as a measurement for days. How was this measurement done before the fourth day if there was not yet a "greater light to govern the day" and "a lesser light to govern the night" and therefore no rotation of the earth according to the sun to determine the hours?
Meaning: How were days being measured before the fourth day? What was this "LIGHT" that God said to be, if God is already light, and was using that light to divide day from night calling that a day before there was a sun? Why was the "greater light" and "lesser light" necessary if there was already "morning" and "night" and "days" and "light" from before?
The word "DAY" seems to have all these flexible meanings within this one account, including not measuring the first three days by the sun or moon in accordance with 24 hour days, 30 day months, and 12 month years.
-------------
The problem for the Young Earth View:
Resolving the concept of measuring "days" as a 24 hour period before the appearance of the sun in the fourth "day" being that the sun and moon were created with the purpose to make those measurements. Why did he create lights in the heavens on the fourth day "to separate the day from the night" when this separation was said to be already done in the first "day?" Also, resolving what is the "light" that God said to "be," seeing as though God already is Light, so what is the light he spoke into existence as distinct from himself, if the sun itself were not created until the fourth day?
The problem for the Old Earth View:
Resolving the fact that the sun was made in the fourth day and after the third day, but that vegetation was created in the third day. How did vegetation exist without the sun for supposed millions of years between "days" before the sun appears? Obviously, vegetation needs photosynthesis (from what we now understand). And, obviously there was light from the first day to the fourth day....but not from the sun as we know from the fourth day. What was the physical light coming from, if not the sun?
-------------
To me it seems a stretch to think that the writer of the creation story as inspired by God was unaware of all these strange issues. It seems intentional to me.
To me, there is way more mystery in this short account than either Old Earth or Young Earth proponents allow or resolve. It's almost like the author of the creation account is not even intending to represent creation how it actually happened, but using physical creation as a parable of some kind and leaving the details of actual creation as a mystery to be solved by science.
God says in other passages that he created all things, but I am wondering if the Genesis account is really the place to find the literal way he created them. I can say this with the knowledge that many things in the Bible have been misunderstood and that by intentional misdirect from God (Christ's parables for example, intended to conceal the kingdom mysteries.)
God outright says that he creates mysteries, so I am just wondering out loud about this one. Am I not seeing it correctly? What are your ideas that might resolve the issues for a literal account? What do you think about the possibility that it's not a literal account?
Maybe there is something I am not seeing that resolves the literal account within itself? Open to all thoughts/ideas.
I am sure this thread might indeed open a can of worms; however, it is indeed a wonderful topic.
I have only my phone so cannot go into too much detail. But I can quote two Scriptures that might help.
Rom 1:20 Every thing that can be known about Father can be seen and fully understood through creation so that man is without excuse.
Note: there is no mention of the creation story.
Pro 3:5 Trust in Father with all your heart, mind and soul and lean not on your own understanding.
Both were quoted from memory, pleaser forgive my memory if a word or two are wrong.
Basically, science has proved that the literal 6 day creation story as a story. Your mentioning day and nights before the creation of the Sun and the moon supports this. Science and physics show the works of an incredible designer, biology just blows 'chance' out of the water.
My take on the creation stories are that the message is far deeper than a mere literal reading. Romans 1:20 as mentioned gives credence to this notion.
Whatever we choose to believe is irrelevant as we are told to TRUST FATHER and not our understanding.
But this is such a wonderful topic, I would love to hear the thoughts of others.
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
And there are so many oddities and variable uses of the concept of day and light, and darkness and night, that it makes little sense to assume that the writer was completely unaware of this. For example, the scripture says "the evening and the morning, the first day." It doesn't say "the evening all the way to the next evening."
Technically evening and morning are 12 hours, not 24 hours, unless evening and morning are idioms for 12 hours night and 12 hours day. In any case, there is definitely more to it than either Young Earth or Old Earth theologies resolve.
Hebrew, from what I know, contains only 3,100 words, whereas the average English person knows something around 7,000 to 8,000 words and the English language has around 250,000+ words. That might account for the difficulty in describing the creation and all the nuances.
It seems to me that the creation account isn't even trying to be easily understood.
I am currently working on a translation of the Hebrew and can say that yes, there is indeed more going on that is not readily visible in most English translations.
Rather than just say what I see (which is actually one of the ancient teachings from some of the sages of old), I will share a unique feature of the creation days and we will begin to unpack the possible hidden meaning behind the story:
Normally, if a simple sequence of numbering is being used, you would use ordinal numbers in this way:
First, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh.
Furthermore, if you were wanting to make sure each sequenced number was linked in that direct ordering, you would add 'the' with each event, so as to say:
The first, the second, the third, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth, the seventh.
If you were wanting to show, not a sequence, but simply a reference to an event, you would use cardinal numbers, like this:
Day one, Day two, Day three, Day four, Day five, Day six, Day seven.
In the creation account, you have two anomalies, unique in scripture to this particular sequencing of events. Here is the ordering, as it would literally be read in English:
Day one, a second day, a third day, a fourth day, a fifth day, the sixth day, the seventh day.
What two differences do you see? And what do you think that tells us about what the Creator may be communicating?
Ronen
Quote from: Seth on December 11, 2013, 01:20:10 AM
It seems to me that the creation account isn't even trying to be easily understood.
And this is wby we must not lose sight of the forest for the sake of a tree or two. :HeartThrob:
Love Julie
Ronen,
Here is what I see in the KJV interlinear:
Day One
And the evening and the morning were the first day: Ereb (dusk) boqer (dawn) hayah (were - the verb "to be") echad (one or first) yom (day)
Day Two
And the evening and the morning were the second day: Ereb (dusk) boqer (dawn) hayah (were) sheniy (double or second) yom (day)
Day Three
And the evening and the morning were the third day: Ereb (dusk) boqer (dawn) hayah (were) sheliyshiy (third) yom (day)
Day Four
And the evening and the morning were the third day: Ereb (dusk) boqer (dawn) hayah (were) rebiy iy (fourth) yom (day)
Day Five
And the evening and the morning were the third day: Ereb (dusk) boqer (dawn) hayah (were) chamiyshiy (fifth) yom (day)
Day Six
And the evening and the morning were the third day: Ereb (dusk) boqer (dawn) hayah (were) shishshiy (sixth) yom (day)
Are there some Hebrew characters that alter how these should be read?
Shalom Seth,
I do not know if you are able to read Hebrew, but when you look at where the text refers to the sixth and seventh days, there is the letter ה prefix, which is the equivalent to the English 'the'.
If you look at days 2-5, they do not have the definite article, meaning in English they would be referred to as 'a' day, not 'the'.
So, you would see 'ha'shishshiy ' (the sixth) and 'ha'shbiyiy' (the seventh).
Also, unlike days 2-7, day 1 is referred to with אחד 'echad' rather than the sequential number 'רשון' meaning 'first', such as in Exodus 12: 15:
...On the first day you shall eradicate leaven...
This unique rendering is meant to cause us to stop and consider something beyond the surface reading...a pattern he is communicating to us.
Ronen
Here is another for consideration.
Gen 1:26 gives an account of humans being made, yet Gen 2:7 (following the 7th day of rest) gives amother different account where Father specifically breathes spirit into the man just created.
This does not indicate the ,8th day, just a time following. We know Cain went to another land filled with an unaccounted for people, which might have stemmed from the first creation story. Father created the garden of Eden and placed Adam and Eve in it at some later time. Possibly 1,000's of years later.
Just good for thought. :Peace2:
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
Remember, Seth, that the Bible is written with a rather broad brush, so to speak, and a lot of details are left out, except for those God deemed important enough to mention.
Further, the ancient Hebrew language, as wonderful as it was, lacked a lot of terms we moderns take for granted. Aramaic, a close relative of Hebrew is a dying language, for it has remained the language of goat and sheep herders, and has not kept up with the times. I have often stated that Jesus lacked the human language to express what the Kingdom of Heaven was like, so instead of a frontal description, He had to beat around the burning bush: "The Kingdom of Heaven is like..."
Given that, God did not express the Creation by describing a Big Bang (if it even happened that way), the expansion of the universe, galaxies, etc, etc, etc. He fell back on that broad brush and poetic, allegorical language. He was not telling a "so-tale," but telling the story in terms His readers and hearers could understand - at least, that's how I see it.
Given that, there are still some amazing things just under the surface of the Creation account. Take this for instance, and I write this from memory, so bear with me: In the Beginning [TIME], God [SPIRIT] created [ENERGY] the Heavens [SPACE] and the Earth [MATTER]. How about that, there are the four fundamental building blocks of physics, time, space, energy, and matter, plus Spirit "the Fifth Element," which more and more scientists are coming to see as necessary in the grand scheme of things.
Many thanks Seth and Lazarus: Seth, for introducing this topic-- I needed a reminder to get serious again (!!) about completing a project the Lord gave me several years ago: OUT OF LOVE, FOR HIS GLORY, GOD CREATED MAN IN HIS OWN IMAGE AND LIKENESS. Of particular interest was your statement "...physical creation as a parable of some kind..." I continue looking at all of Scriptures in light of 1 Cor 15... physical first then spiritual ... (physical realities reveal spiritual truths)
Many thanks Lazarus particularly for TIME SPIRIT ENERGY SPACE MATTER --fundamental building blocks... what are your thoughts on creation out of nothing... somewhere I read that that has become a "plausible hypothesis" ???
I continue to look at John 17 for what I think is a basic outline of God's glorious plan to bring all to be with Him for all eternity.
I had planned on not posting for a few weeks on the few Christian forums that I visit often, but it seems that man plans, but God directs our steps.
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 04:27:08 AM
...what are your thoughts on creation out of nothing... somewhere I read that that has become a "plausible hypothesis" ???
The universe is mostly empty space, the galaxy is mostly empty space, the solar system is mostly empty space, and the atoms are mostly empty space. God made space and matter, but the amount of matter, as we dig deeper into the "matter," is disappearingly small. Therefore, creation out of nothing doesn't really take us so very far. Spoken into existence, our present world/age is not entirely real (it is an image), but the New Earth and the New Heavens will be.
Quote from: gregoryfl on December 11, 2013, 02:27:06 AM
Shalom Seth,
I do not know if you are able to read Hebrew, but when you look at where the text refers to the sixth and seventh days, there is the letter ה prefix, which is the equivalent to the English 'the'.
If you look at days 2-5, they do not have the definite article, meaning in English they would be referred to as 'a' day, not 'the'.
So, you would see 'ha'shishshiy ' (the sixth) and 'ha'shbiyiy' (the seventh).
Also, unlike days 2-7, day 1 is referred to with אחד 'echad' rather than the sequential number 'רשון' meaning 'first', such as in Exodus 12: 15:
...On the first day you shall eradicate leaven...
This unique rendering is meant to cause us to stop and consider something beyond the surface reading...a pattern he is communicating to us.
Ronen
Interesting information!
So the text would read "Day one, a second day, a third day, a fourth day, a fifth day, the sixth day, the seventh day." as you said.
What do you draw from this concerning the literal account?
Quote from: Lazarus Short on December 11, 2013, 03:07:51 AM
Given that, God did not express the Creation by describing a Big Bang (if it even happened that way), the expansion of the universe, galaxies, etc, etc, etc. He fell back on that broad brush and poetic, allegorical language. He was not telling a "so-tale," but telling the story in terms His readers and hearers could understand - at least, that's how I see it.
That's just it though. It seems understandable on the surface, according to a quick reading, but once you start looking at every phrase, there are multiple different uses of the word "DAY" plus seemingly strange events like God creating day and night, and morning and evening before the sun was made on the fourth day. So, obviously, this makes the Young Earth account problematic. How were dawn and dusk functioning without a sun in accordance with the rotation of the earth. What was the light emanating from before the fourth day? How was the light disappearing and reappearing (morning and night) before the fourth day? Why was there terminology like "evening and morning" before the "greater light to rule the day" appeared by which man can number the days?
It's all very strange. Seemingly simple, but not so much really....
It puts into question for me that this is a literal account, or at least a linear account.
For awhile now, I keep thinking..if the earth is only 7,000 literal years old, what was Eternal God doing for all that "time" before that?
Why do you/we think God would be so secretive about it? I honestly don't know, except somehow it's for our benefit and His glory, but that leaves a whole lot of "blanks"... trust, right? :)
Quote from: Seth on December 11, 2013, 07:17:39 AM
That's just it though. It seems understandable on the surface, according to a quick reading, but once you start looking at every phrase, there are multiple different uses of the word "DAY" plus seemingly strange events like God creating day and night, and morning and evening before the sun was made on the fourth day. So, obviously, this makes the Young Earth account problematic. How were dawn and dusk functioning without a sun in accordance with the rotation of the earth. What was the light emanating from before the fourth day? How was the light disappearing and reappearing (morning and night) before the fourth day? Why was there terminology like "evening and morning" before the "greater light to rule the day" appeared by which man can number the days?
It's all very strange. Seemingly simple, but not so much really....
It puts into question for me that this is a literal account, or at least a linear account.
Don't think for a minute that Laz knows all the answers! But then again, don't think for a minute that when God said, "Let there be light," that that light came from the sun, for the text does not say that. I'm sure there were things happening at the time, not mentioned in the story, which would answer all your questions. Now, most of my books and Bibles are packed right now, and the only Bible I have at hand is my FFV, and Fenton renders time periods as "periods ["headships" as mentioned in his notes]," "day," "night," "first age," "second age," etc.
I think the Creation story is like a lot of what we read in our Bibles - true as far as it goes, even if it does not tell the whole story. God is not trying to give us an exhaustive history of His Cosmos, nor does He need to.
One solution concerning light.
Light is invisible. What we call light is actually a reflection of particles of matter,
the invisible light being reflected to our eyes because of these particles of matter.
Since there was no matter prior to it's creation, there was nothing to be seen.
"Let there be light" can easily be construed as God bringing matter into existence so that light could be seen
by it reflecting off of matter.
On the moon, there is no light visible behind a rock facing the sun.
This doesn't happen on earth because our atmosphere refracts the light.
It's why you can see clearly during the day even when sitting on a shady side of a building or house.
Revelation says that God will be our light. He may well have been the light source the few days before the sun was created.
BTW, there is no mention of when the earth's rotation started. It may have been at the same time the sun was created.
What did God do before the earth was created, Jab? We can't concieve of not living in a linear time continuum because time is dependent on matter. Prior to the creation of matter, there was no time, at the very least, no way to measure time.
So, the period before creation can't be measured in any way. We therefore have no conception of what it is like for time not to exist. Matter is all around us and we are matter. No Time? No Matter. and it doesn't matter there was no time. :winkgrin:
Night and day has some hidden meaning according to Jewish scholars.
Night = dark = chaos = sin/evil
Day = light = order = holiness
A Jewish day starts with night (~18:00 - ~6:00) and ends with day (~6:00 - ~18:00)
That's seen as a huge pattern. A summary of the whole Bible.
God's plan is to change darkness into light.
Quote from: Seth on December 10, 2013, 10:24:47 PM
In other words: day (yom) + night = yom (day). So, is a day 12 hours? Or 24 hours, or millions of years?
So already we have in interesting use of the word YOM as having distinct meanings indicating differing time frames.
John 11:19 Jesus answered, "Are there not twelve hours of daylight? Anyone who walks in the daytime will not stumble, for they see by this world's light.
That
seems to answer your question. 12 hours light + night.
"Seems" because there are other definitions of day.
Sunrise to noon is called day. Noon to sunset is eve(ning).
--> Lambs were slaughtered in the eve. Or more exactly, between the evenings.
Just when Lamb Jesus died 3pm
So there are several 'days' not unlike English (or Dutch) btw. A day lasts 24 hours and that day has a part called night and day. And that day has a part called morning and afternoon.
Another thing to note is that the 7th day isn't 'formally closed' as the other days.
(And Adam never formally woke up)
God seems to define a day as a period of darkness followed by a period of daylight.
But not even that is so simple....
The Jewish agricultural year starts at Passover/spring and ends at Passover/spring. Light ---> Light
But new year is celebrated during fall. Sabbath/Jubilee years start at that day.
Dark--->Dark
So years overlap 50%. And so do days (and possible festivals als)
There are quite a few verses that show, or at least strongly indicate, the ancient Jews at sunrise-->Sunrise days but a sunset-->sunset Sabbath.
I can tell you, only start Googling if you have a loooot of time because it's it very much related to resurrection(day) so a lot of muddling the water is going on :winkgrin:
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 11, 2013, 09:34:48 AM
I can tell you, only start Googling if you have a loooot of time because it's it very much related to resurrection(day) so a lot of muddling the water is going on :winkgrin:
This is one of the reasons I believe it's not as simple as saying that Genesis 1 represents a linear creation account, or even a literal one. I'm not hard and fast on that, which is why I opened the topic to see if others could resolve it.
Quote from: Lazarus ShortDon't think for a minute that Laz knows all the answers! But then again, don't think for a minute that when God said, "Let there be light," that that light came from the sun, for the text does not say that.
I agree. And it's something that I don't think many Christians consider who insist on a 6,000 year old earth. I read the creation account many times and never caught it. Recently, I saw an infamous young earth proponent named Kent Hovind say that "God is light" in reference to this issue. That doesn't really solve the problem, because God said "Let there be light." He wasn't saying, let there be God. Obviously, there was a quality of this light that caused it to be divided from the darkness and to create evening and morning be created without the sun.
The idea that light is invisible is interesting, but by what manner did this invisible light create division from the darkness. Was the darkness invisible too? If the light was invisible, then wasn't the land still dark, and essentially without a morning and night by which to create a day?
Daniel 26 suggests that it could be an idiom
Daniel 8:26
The vision of the evenings and the mornings that have been given to you is true, but seal up the vision for it concerns the distant futureSo maybe "evening and morning" concerns itself with closing out one process to start another, and not having to do necessarily with the literal creation of evening and morning.
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 11, 2013, 09:12:19 AM
Night and day has some hidden meaning according to Jewish scholars.
Night = dark = chaos = sin/evil
Day = light = order = holiness
A Jewish day starts with night (~18:00 - ~6:00) and ends with day (~6:00 - ~18:00)
That's seen as a huge pattern. A summary of the whole Bible.
God's plan is to change darkness into light.
re: God's plan is to change darkness into light. So many scripture verses come to mind as I read WW's reply... today, I just wish to share three or four
Colossians 1 (AMP)
v 12 Giving thanks to the Father, Who has qualified and made us fit to share the portion which is the inheritance of the saints (God's holy people) in the Light.
v 13 [The Father] has delivered and drawn us to Himself out of the control and the dominion of darkness and has transferred us into the kingdom of the Son of His love.
v 14 In Whom we have our redemption through His blood, [which means] the forgiveness of our sins.
OT
Isaiah 60:2
For behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and dense darkness all peoples, but the Lord shall arise upon you [O Jerusalem], and His glory shall be seen on you.
Isaiah 9:2
The people who walked in darkness have seen a great Light; those who dwelt in the land of intense darkness and the shadow of death, upon them has the Light shined.
NT
Matt 4:16
The people who sat (dwelt enveloped) in darkness have seen a great Light, and for those who sat in the land and shadow of death Light has dawned.
===
re: summary of whole Bible
It seems to me that God's plan includes:
changing emptiness into fullness
changing death into Life
changing chaos into order
changing lust into love
well, now I must search for scripture verses that support these four changes...
:thumbsup:
Great post Seth and Anna !!
Loved it ,,,,,,
it was good up till then God had made everything and it was VERY GOOD !
Gen 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Gen 2:1 ¶ Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
to me Jesus is the 7th day SANCITIFIED and the rest for all those whom were heavy laden ,
Mat 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Mat 11:29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
Mat 11:30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. For me seeing this as the light as in both knowing the Father and Son and the Light unto the world knowledge of HIM !!
The darkness is the ignorance of him and the Light is the Knowledge of Him !!
2Cr 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
2Cr 4:5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.
2Cr 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
2Cr 4:7 ¶ But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.
Quote from: jabcat on December 11, 2013, 07:53:39 AM
For awhile now, I keep thinking..if the earth is only 7,000 literal years old, what was Eternal God doing for all that "time" before that?
Why do you/we think God would be so secretive about it? I honestly don't know, except somehow it's for our benefit and His glory, but that leaves a whole lot of "blanks"... trust, right? :)
Re: what was Eternal God doing... before???
What saith the Scriptures?
but first, my very brief commentary :)
It seems to me that in John 17, Jesus tells us what He and His Father were doing before.... sharing love and glory, discussing God's glorious plan to bring ALL to be with Him for ALL eternity.
Just three verses (I encourage all to read all of John Chapter 17)
John 17
v 5 Now, Father, bring me into the glory we shared BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN.
v 8 for I have passed on to them the message You gave me. They accepted it and know that I came from You, and they BELIEVE YOU SENT ME.
v 24 Father, I want these whom you have given me to be with me where I am. Then they can see all the glory You gave Me BECAUSE YOU LOVED ME EVEN BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN.
Quote from: Lazarus Short on December 11, 2013, 06:52:55 AM
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 04:27:08 AM
...what are your thoughts on creation out of nothing... somewhere I read that that has become a "plausible hypothesis" ???
The universe is mostly empty space, the galaxy is mostly empty space, the solar system is mostly empty space, and the atoms are mostly empty space. God made space and matter, but the amount of matter, as we dig deeper into the "matter," is disappearingly small. Therefore, creation out of nothing doesn't really take us so very far. Spoken into existence, our present world/age is not entirely real (it is an image), but the New Earth and the New Heavens will be.
RE: not entirely real... it is an image
Lazarus, I'm not certain I understand what you are sharing... it sounds to me like the physical is not real??? in which case, I offer a Scripture that causes me to reflect a bit ...
Luke 24:36-39
Now while they were talking about this, Jesus Himself took His stand among them and said to them, Peace (freedom from all the distresses that are experienced as the result of sin) be to you!
But they were so startled and terrified that they thought they saw a spirit.
And He said to them, Why are you disturbed and troubled, and why do such doubts and questionings arise in your hearts?
See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself! Feel and handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see that I have.
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 08:40:10 PM
Luke 24:36-39
Now while they were talking about this, Jesus Himself took His stand among them and said to them, Peace (freedom from all the distresses that are experienced as the result of sin) be to you!
But they were so startled and terrified that they thought they saw a spirit.
And He said to them, Why are you disturbed and troubled, and why do such doubts and questionings arise in your hearts?
See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself! Feel and handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see that I have.
This is what I am really getting at. I am totally on board with the spiritual implications of the light being called by God into the darkness being Jesus Christ born into the flesh to divide light from dark by giving truth....
But what I want to know is where do you guys fall in the LITERAL account of Genesis? Do you believe it was 6 24 hour days? Do you believe it was 6 long day (AGES)? Is it a literal account at all? Is it a parable ONLY told using the literal ways God formed the universe, but told out of order?
Hi Seth: again thanks for starting this thread.
re: young earth/old earth
I've quieted my mind and heart regarding what I find to be unexplainable/unanswerable (humanly speaking ) :) about the "creation account"
by asking yet another question If God "could" create a mature man (Adam) can He not also create a mature earth??? just some thoughts which are neither random nor carved in stone...
Rom 5:14 tells us that Adam is a figure of the One Who (Jesus) is to come...
Luke 3:23 tells us that Jesus was about thirty years old when He BEGAN His public ministry
Numbers 4:3 tells us that men become eligible to serve in the Tabernacle when they turn 30 years old...
so I'm thinking that Adam was created a mature man (30 years old) so how old is a mature earth????
An interesting aside:
Gen 5
v 3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a on in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth
v 4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years; and he begat sons and daughters.
v 5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
oops... just read your latest post... at this point I believe that the numbers used in discussing days, years, etc., are important... so if the earth is literally 7000 years old (please note, I said "if") physical reality=7000 years old; it's the 7 that gives us the spiritual truth... it doesn't so much matter how many hours there are in a day, etc., I need to think and pray about this some more...
Quote from: anna274I've quieted my mind and heart regarding what I find to be unexplainable/unanswerable (humanly speaking ) :) about the "creation account"
This is the interesting thing, and is why I brought up the subject. Usually the debate is that the creation account doesn't square with science. Actually, it doesn't technically even seem to square with itself! In other words, it seems to sidestep any real attempt to explain the actual origin of the physical universe just by its own telling.
This would remove all necessity for Athiests and Creationists to use Genesis 1 as a way to compete philosophies. The way Genesis 1 reads, you'd almost need to take it out of the science realm altogether, that God isn't even attempting to explain the origins of the physical universe sequentially or realistically.
Quote from: Seth on December 11, 2013, 07:09:07 AM
Interesting information!
So the text would read "Day one, a second day, a third day, a fourth day, a fifth day, the sixth day, the seventh day." as you said.
What do you draw from this concerning the literal account?
Exactly. There are different elements to the entirety of this account, done in Eastern semitic thoughtform. The fact that days' 2-5 do not contain the definite article 'the' (in spite of the mistranslations of most English versions), tells us that these days are not in chronological order, but are being grouped in a poetic parallelism (three days of בדל (separation)) (three days of ברא (hewing creatively)).
Most mistakenly think that there was no sun, moon, and stars until day 4, but that is not what the Hebrew says. All of the materials for creation were present back in verse 1, ready to go...similar to someone having all the parts and materials for a model plane laid out on the table. The sun, moon and stars were there from before day 1, but were not עשה (designated by fashioning) as such until day 4, simply because they were not needed as such until the first life appeared in the form of plantlife. Father then designated the agricultural clock to rule over each day and night, which has continued season after season until this day. Such a designation was not needed until plantlife came to be. This is similar to bringing together a group of men to play football. As they play together, one of them ends up being designated to be captain of the team. This does not mean he was not functioning as such before then, or worse yet, not on the team, but was simply not designated officially as a captain until later on. He was on the team from day 1 and showed the character of a captain, even before he was עשה by the coach.
The completion of his מלאכה (work done by sending his word as a messenger) is emphasized by the first use of the definite article in day 6. This is then followed by the continual completed state of שבת (ceasing) pictured as 'the' seventh day...continual because, even though there was technically an eighth day, the seventh day does not contain the phrase 'and there was evening, and there was morning'.
I will leave it at this for now, as I know the dangers of too much info in a post. Hopefully this at least gives some food for thought from one who is of an Eastern Semitic mindset.
The phrase 'evening and morning' gives us a definition of what יום is being referred to. As an aside, I read one of the posts referring to the 'evenings and mornings' in Daniel 8:26. This is a reference to the evening and morning sacrifices, which could be counted so as to know when they were made to cease, as the context shows.
Ronen
Quote from: gregoryfl on December 11, 2013, 10:06:45 PM
Quote from: Seth on December 11, 2013, 07:09:07 AM
Interesting information!
So the text would read "Day one, a second day, a third day, a fourth day, a fifth day, the sixth day, the seventh day." as you said.
What do you draw from this concerning the literal account?
Exactly. There are different elements to the entirety of this account, done in Eastern semitic thoughtform. The fact that days' 2-5 do not contain the definite article 'the' (in spite of the mistranslations of most English versions), tells us that these days are not in chronological order, but are being grouped in a poetic parallelism (three days of בדל (separation)) (three days of ברא (hewing creatively)).
Most mistakenly think that there was no sun, moon, and stars until day 4, but that is not what the Hebrew says. All of the materials for creation were present back in verse 1, ready to go...similar to someone having all the parts and materials for a model plane laid out on the table. The sun, moon and stars were there from before day 1, but were not עשה (designated by fashioning) as such until day 4, simply because they were not needed as such until the first life appeared in the form of plantlife. Father then designated the agricultural clock to rule over each day and night, which has continued season after season until this day. Such a designation was not needed until plantlife came to be. This is similar to bringing together a group of men to play football. As they play together, one of them ends up being designated to be captain of the team. This does not mean he was not functioning as such before then, or worse yet, not on the team, but was simply not designated officially as a captain until later on. He was on the team from day 1 and showed the character of a captain, even before he was עשה by the coach.
The completion of his מלאכה (work done by sending his word as a messenger) is emphasized by the first use of the definite article in day 6. This is then followed by the continual completed state of שבת (ceasing) pictured as 'the' seventh day...continual because, even though there was technically an eighth day, the seventh day does not contain the phrase 'and there was evening, and there was morning'.
I will leave it at this for now, as I know the dangers of too much info in a post. Hopefully this at least gives some food for thought from one who is of an Eastern Semitic mindset.
The phrase 'evening and morning' gives us a definition of what יום is being referred to. As an aside, I read one of the posts referring to the 'evenings and mornings' in Daniel 8:26. This is a reference to the evening and morning sacrifices, which could be counted so as to know when they were made to cease, as the context shows.
Ronen
This is very interesting info and entirely new to me. Do you have any online articles or sites you can point me to for any further info?
One more thing I wished to add. Just as the 2nd-7th days were being grouped, not chronologically, but thematically, so too, what is referred to as יום אחד (day one) is not speaking of a יום רשון (first day) but rather is being descriptive the type of day...concretely speaking of a honed day; of evening and morning (2 parts) honed into one unit called 'day'. The next use of this type of phrase is found in Bereshiyt 2:24, where man and woman (2 humans) become honed into one unit which we call 'marriage'.
Ronen
Your explanation certainly would resolve the fourth day problem. Also, are you saying that the Genesis 1 account does not explain God's creation of matter itself? In other words, does the explanation assume that physical matter itself is eternal and not been created by God?
Also, one of the Young Earth arguments to a sequential telling is based off this exodus verse:
Exodus 20
8Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
What would your response be to that argument?
Quote from: Seth on December 11, 2013, 06:12:52 PM
Quote from: Lazarus ShortDon't think for a minute that Laz knows all the answers! But then again, don't think for a minute that when God said, "Let there be light," that that light came from the sun, for the text does not say that.
I agree. And it's something that I don't think many Christians consider who insist on a 6,000 year old earth.
Jews hold another view.
Mankind is 6000 years old.
The days before Adam are God's calendar.
Quote from: Seth on December 11, 2013, 10:26:52 PM
Your explanation certainly would resolve the fourth day problem. Also, are you saying that the Genesis 1 account does not explain God's creation of matter itself? In other words, does the explanation assume that physical matter itself is eternal and not been created by God?
What I understand is that it indeed explains God's creation of matter. That is found in verse 1. The rest of the narrative I see explaining how he advanced upon that creation to bring it to completion by the sixth day. I do not believe matter is eternal (as in having always existed). However, I do not hold to a creation out of nothing 'ex nihilo', but instead, of our Father ברא (preparedly hewing), which is what the concrete meaning we know of as 'create' is, all that exists out of Himself. As Paul said 'all is out of him...'
In short, rather than creation out of nothing, I hold to a creation out of God.
The sages say this took place by His sending his word, the specific combinations of letters, consisting of the vibrations of sounds making up all matter. The smallest particles of matter are essentially vibrations in space time fabric. Those combinations of sound, in the hands of our Creator, formed the basis of all that exists, and also is held together by them. This I see consistent with what Paul wrote concerning the 'Word' who became the Mashiach of God... (Col 1:16,17) that by him all things exist and are held together.
QuoteAlso, one of the Young Earth arguments to a sequential telling is based off this exodus verse:
Exodus 20
8Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
What would your response be to that argument?
This text tells me, not that he ברא (created) everything in six days, but that he עשה (made) them, which is exactly consistent with what I shared in my other post. That which took place in Bereshiyt 1:3 and onward, only accounts for what he did with the building blocks already in place in verses 1 and 2 by means of ברא. It does not tell us anything specifically about the length of time in verses 1 and 2.
You may wonder why I keep referring to ברא as 'hewing' rather than 'creating'. The word carries the connotation of cutting something in preparation, for the making of something. Here is one little known use of the word which gives this meaning from a very easy to understand human viewpoint.
(Jos 17:15)
And Joshua answered them, If thou art a great people, then go up to the wood, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim is too narrow for thee.
Here we see that they were to cut down, or hew, a section of trees in the forest to prepare a place for them to live. The word 'cut down' is this word ברא. Same word as in Gen 1:1. In breaking down the letters that define this word (which is my passion) it is a 'hewing' בר for the purpose of 'cultivating' א. God, in a sense, cut or hewed out of himself all that exists. He did this by his word, which comes from within him, his mind, thoughts and plan, if you will. That is why he can be spoken of as being in all things...i.e. He fills heaven and earth...yet not be those things.
Ronen
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 08:40:10 PM
Quote from: Lazarus Short on December 11, 2013, 06:52:55 AM
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 04:27:08 AM
...what are your thoughts on creation out of nothing... somewhere I read that that has become a "plausible hypothesis" ???
The universe is mostly empty space, the galaxy is mostly empty space, the solar system is mostly empty space, and the atoms are mostly empty space. God made space and matter, but the amount of matter, as we dig deeper into the "matter," is disappearingly small. Therefore, creation out of nothing doesn't really take us so very far. Spoken into existence, our present world/age is not entirely real (it is an image), but the New Earth and the New Heavens will be.
RE: not entirely real... it is an image
Lazarus, I'm not certain I understand what you are sharing... it sounds to me like the physical is not real??? in which case, I offer a Scripture that causes me to reflect a bit ...
Luke 24:36-39
Now while they were talking about this, Jesus Himself took His stand among them and said to them, Peace (freedom from all the distresses that are experienced as the result of sin) be to you!
But they were so startled and terrified that they thought they saw a spirit.
And He said to them, Why are you disturbed and troubled, and why do such doubts and questionings arise in your hearts?
See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself! Feel and handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see that I have.
Well, I see it this way: The spiritual/invisible world came first, and that makes it real reality, if that makes sense to you. At the Creation, the earthly/visible world was made, and being not a part of the original reality, it is less real than the spiritual/invisible realm. Of course it is/seems very real to us on this side of the veil, but that will change when we step over...
Thanks Lazarus for the explanation.
re: "...if that makes sense to you."
Yes, it makes sense to me-- philosophical sense; it's just that I have great need to learn 'what saith the scriptures'.
Quote from: Seth on December 10, 2013, 10:24:47 PM
The problem for the Young Earth View:
Resolving the concept of measuring "days" as a 24 hour period before the appearance of the sun in the fourth "day" being that the sun and moon were created with the purpose to make those measurements. Why did he create lights in the heavens on the fourth day "to separate the day from the night" when this separation was said to be already done in the first "day?" Also, resolving what is the "light" that God said to "be," seeing as though God already is Light, so what is the light he spoke into existence as distinct from himself, if the sun itself were not created until the fourth day?
..but isn't that kind of like saying before the clock was created, there wasn't time? :Chinscratch: ? :smile:
Quote from: Seth on December 10, 2013, 10:24:47 PM
The problem for the Old Earth View:
Resolving the fact that the sun was made in the fourth day and after the third day, but that vegetation was created in the third day. How did vegetation exist without the sun for supposed millions of years between "days" before the sun appears? Obviously, vegetation needs photosynthesis (from what we now understand). And, obviously there was light from the first day to the fourth day....but not from the sun as we know from the fourth day. What was the physical light coming from, if not the sun?
:thumbsup:
Quote from: Seth on December 10, 2013, 10:24:47 PM
To me it seems a stretch to think that the writer of the creation story as inspired by God was unaware of all these strange issues. It seems intentional to me.
To me, there is way more mystery in this short account than either Old Earth or Young Earth proponents allow or resolve. It's almost like the author of the creation account is not even intending to represent creation how it actually happened, but using physical creation as a parable of some kind and leaving the details of actual creation as a mystery to be solved by science.
God says in other passages that he created all things, but I am wondering if the Genesis account is really the place to find the literal way he created them. I can say this with the knowledge that many things in the Bible have been misunderstood and that by intentional misdirect from God (Christ's parables for example, intended to conceal the kingdom mysteries.)
God outright says that he creates mysteries, so I am just wondering out loud about this one. Am I not seeing it correctly? What are your ideas that might resolve the issues for a literal account? What do you think about the possibility that it's not a literal account?
Maybe there is something I am not seeing that resolves the literal account within itself? Open to all thoughts/ideas.
Very interesting! Even before reading further in this thread..
I have a strong tendency of leaning towards the very literal of "yom", "one evening and one morning a day".
I don't think of this description as the how.. (a big bang tho I would think what with elements moving around so quickly in one day:)
but just a overall description.. and I don't trust science to find the answers.. but when we need to know, by prayer and waiting upon Him, one would begin to know..
I guess i'm pretty much a diehard literalist as i see otherwise as a Pandora's box leading to confusion, as to what's literal and what's myth.. (except prophecy which makes use of symbols.. literal events depicted by symbols)
? :smile: God bless
Quote from: JulieTang84 on December 11, 2013, 02:37:31 AM
Here is another for consideration.
Gen 1:26 gives an account of humans being made, yet Gen 2:7 (following the 7th day of rest) gives amother different account where Father specifically breathes spirit into the man just created.
This does not indicate the ,8th day, just a time following. We know Cain went to another land filled with an unaccounted for people, which might have stemmed from the first creation story. Father created the garden of Eden and placed Adam and Eve in it at some later time. Possibly 1,000's of years later.
Just good for thought. :Peace2:
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
Hi Julie :smile: i've always thought of this as an insert.. like in a history book or magazine, an insert that provides more info on a certain thing.. just food for thought too.. theory :laughing7:
Quote from: Lazarus Short on December 11, 2013, 03:07:51 AM
In the Beginning [TIME], God [SPIRIT] created [ENERGY] the Heavens [SPACE] and the Earth [MATTER]. How about that, there are the four fundamental building blocks of physics, time, space, energy, and matter, plus Spirit "the Fifth Element," which more and more scientists are coming to see as necessary in the grand scheme of things.
..that's awesome! :))
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 04:27:08 AM
OUT OF LOVE, FOR HIS GLORY, GOD CREATED MAN IN HIS OWN IMAGE AND LIKENESS.
:thumbsup: sounds kool!
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 04:27:08 AM
..thoughts on creation out of nothing... somewhere I read that that has become a "plausible hypothesis" ???
i think of "In the beginning God" so think of everything made as made out of one thing, one substance or essence.. God...
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 04:27:08 AM
I continue to look at John 17 for what I think is a basic outline of God's glorious plan to bring all to be with Him for all eternity.
awesome! i love that chapter, :Chinscratch: i'm off to read it.. :dsunny:
I had planned on not posting for a few weeks on the few Christian forums that I visit often, but it seems that man plans, but God directs our steps.
[/quote]
Quote from: anna274 on December 11, 2013, 08:31:20 PM
Quote from: jabcat on December 11, 2013, 07:53:39 AM
For awhile now, I keep thinking..if the earth is only 7,000 literal years old, what was Eternal God doing for all that "time" before that?
Why do you/we think God would be so secretive about it? I honestly don't know, except somehow it's for our benefit and His glory, but that leaves a whole lot of "blanks"... trust, right? :)
Re: what was Eternal God doing... before???
What saith the Scriptures?
but first, my very brief commentary :)
It seems to me that in John 17, Jesus tells us what He and His Father were doing before.... sharing love and glory, discussing God's glorious plan to bring ALL to be with Him for ALL eternity.
Just three verses (I encourage all to read all of John Chapter 17)
John 17
v 5 Now, Father, bring me into the glory we shared BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN.
v 8 for I have passed on to them the message You gave me. They accepted it and know that I came from You, and they BELIEVE YOU SENT ME.
v 24 Father, I want these whom you have given me to be with me where I am. Then they can see all the glory You gave Me BECAUSE YOU LOVED ME EVEN BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN.
Great post.
Not to mention that I am sure they were also just loving each other an hangin out enjoying one another's company :o)
Quote from: marie glen on December 12, 2013, 05:14:44 PM
Quote from: Seth on December 10, 2013, 10:24:47 PM
The problem for the Young Earth View:
Resolving the concept of measuring "days" as a 24 hour period before the appearance of the sun in the fourth "day" being that the sun and moon were created with the purpose to make those measurements. Why did he create lights in the heavens on the fourth day "to separate the day from the night" when this separation was said to be already done in the first "day?" Also, resolving what is the "light" that God said to "be," seeing as though God already is Light, so what is the light he spoke into existence as distinct from himself, if the sun itself were not created until the fourth day?
..but isn't that kind of like saying before the clock was created, there wasn't time? :Chinscratch: ? :smile:
But the question is, how is time measured? We know a 24 hour day from the rotation of the earth in accordance with the sun. Not only that, Jesus said that a day is 12 hours, not 24 hours, and the word "yom" is used to mean all different kinds of times in the Bible, as in a day of judgment for Israel, or the day of Moses. It can refer to an era, rather than a single day.
Notwithstanding all that, the sun was created on the fourth day. So the Young Earth literal view loses some credibility with me because it's hard to prove that the days were 24 hours, when there was no sun.
It's not saying there was no time. But there is no saying for certain how GOD was measuring that time, especially before the fourth day. There is no proof that
God was measuring "day" at that point the same way
man does now according the sun and moon, when God hadn't yet created the sun and moon to use for these measurements.
I think WhiteWings alluded to this when he said that the Jews view the creation account from the perspective of God time rather than man's time. With God a day can be as a thousand years...
I think Ronen has an interesting idea of how the days may not be sequential as well. Either way, to me I used to be resistant to not taking the Genesis account literally, until I really started to read the text, and saw that the text itself is much more complicated than I had thought, and that the text itself seems to be resisting a simple, literal reading as to a series of 24 hour days.
To me it is literal, as periods of time, but even so - it is clear that there were no 24 hour days before the sun and the moon and the stars were created. The word, yom, gives no indication of the exact duration of the "day" it refers to since yom, throughout the scriptures is used to refer to periods of time with various durations.
Quote from: eaglesway on December 12, 2013, 06:37:42 PM
To me it is literal, as periods of time, but even so - it is clear that there were no 24 hour days before the sun and the moon and the stars were created. The word, yom, gives no indication of the exact duration of the "day" it refers to since yom, throughout the scriptures is used to refer to periods of time with various durations.
It seems to me that God is using the literal creation but explaining it in a mysterious way. Even if the "yom" is a long period of time, what does that say about how plant life in the third "day" engaged in photosynthesis without the sun on the fourth "day?" This would make the earth older than the sun by thousands/millions/billions of years. The plant life would have to subsist on a source of physical light coming from a mysterious source. We can always defer to the miraculous for an answer, but if so, it's equally valid to question whether or not God even intends for us to take Genesis 1 as a sequential, literal account.
What I am wondering is if God rearranged the account in order to create a prophecy about Christ, rather than showing us how the universe was actually created. Maybe God is USING his creation to tell a story of Jesus, and therefore using the parts to form the prophecy without regard for how creation actually happened. All throughout the Bible God used literal things to reveal Christ. Maybe God is doing that with the creation story itself, and therefore his goal with Genesis 1 is different than we thought.
I am wondering if God is allowing scientists to discover how the universe was created (by God). But in Genesis 1, God is taking all the elements and putting them together to teach about Christ, something science cannot do.
In the beginning was the Word. Maybe that is why God started with "let there be Light" even though the sun was created on the fourth day, as if to say that the Word is the true light from which creation may distinguish the dark (evil) from light (good) regardless of the physical light. Just something I am wondering...
....... :2c: what I understand of it[not much!] is the Ancient of Days is actually the Great Day....
where the heavens are all rolled up into one place[TODAY] like a scroll.... the heavens...sun moon stars etc
as keepers of time/days/seasons/ages...time all rolled up into TODAY.
imagine the linear time as a long long scroll...that when it is rolled up it is no longer linear
but spiraled togather in one place[book of life/creation]
the ancient of days exists before He writes/speaks the creation into existence.......
I AM the first and the last[of the scroll of life He writes] the beginning and the end[of the scroll]
He exists when it is finished..and rests..... the new creation is already written into the scroll of life
a golden thread all the way through it........from Genesis prophecy of the woman's seed
to the end call to come drink lifes water free
since He is Light..it is always TODAY[Day] where He is....He knows what dwells in the darkness
[like when we were being formed in the lowest parts of the earth[woman's womb]
the thing is to remember..the creation as He writes it[or speaks it as WORD] is first the natural
...then the spiritual.....and according to where are place is written or prepared for us in this scroll
we roll up[return into the heavens..or come down..into the natural..through this linear 'time' design
I like that way of thinking about it. I don't think in terms of timeLESSness, but rather a higher dimension of time that our minds cannot yet grapple with. We will see as in a clear mirror soon enough. I think the scroll metaphor is a good one to consider...
Thanks Seth and Sheila
re: ...the scroll metaphor is a good one to consider. I agree wholeheartedly!! :)
re: ...creation as He writes it [or speaks it as WORD] is first the natural... then the spiritual
Much, much tasty (taste and see) food to consider or as the Bereans ...search the Scriptures...always keeping in mind, of course, to ask the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth.
Quote from: Seth on December 12, 2013, 06:52:23 PM
What I am wondering is if God rearranged the account in order to create a prophecy about Christ... In the beginning was the Word. Maybe that is why God started with "let there be Light" even though the sun was created on the fourth day, as if to say that the Word is the true light from which creation may distinguish the dark (evil) from light (good) regardless of the physical light. Just something I am wondering...
The patterns do indeed reveal Mashiach. Even though the sun, moon, and stars were in their raw material present from even before what is called 'active period one', one of the reasons (aside from the natural agricultural timeclock) they are not designated as light sources until what is called 'a fourth active period' has to do with Mashiach.
He is also spoken about in the pattern of 3, 30, and 300, in which are hidden all throughout the scripture prophecy speaking of his death, burial, and resurrection.
There is life on the earth from day 1, even though it is not directly mentioned. Here is why I see that.
Like I said, all the raw materials for heaven and earth were already present from verse 1.
The condition of the earth in verse 2, being under water, was in a buried state.
The prophet states (using the pattern of 3) After two days he will revive us. On the third day he will raise us up, and we will live before him. (Hos 6:2). We also need to see verse 3 with this as well, which goes on to say...Let us acknowledge YHWH. Let us press on to know YHWH. As surely as the sun rises, YHWH will appear. He will come to us like the rain, like the spring rain that waters the earth."
On the first active period, he reveals the light out of the darkness, which Paul declares to be about the glory of the good news shining in our formerly dark hearts. The light was always there, just hidden by the darkness, waiting to be revealed. Also, as it is written...As surely as the sun rises, YHWH will appear.
On a second active period, he reveals the atmosphere we call 'sky', by dividing the waters vertically. This creates what is needed for 'life', which is concretely understood to be animation by the act of breathing. Without the sky, life on earth would be impossible. After 2 days he will revive (chayahnu...breathe us). With the sky being revealed, the conditions are also there for rain to occur. As it is written...He will come to us like the rain...
On a third active period, he now proceeds to reveal the yabbashah 'dry ground', by dividing the waters horizontally, gathering them to one place. This gathering is called 'miqweh' (I use the more ancient pronunciation of Hebrew...w for v). This refers to what westerners call 'baptism'. Miqweh also expresses the idea of expectation, of a sure hope, such as Jeremiah writes about...
YHWH, the
hope (miqweh) of Israel, all who forsake you shall be disappointed. Those who depart from me shall be written in the earth, because they have forsaken Yahweh, the spring of living waters. (Jer 17:13)
Now the stage is set for the expectation to be revealed. On the third day we now have all of the conditions necessary for the first life to be revealed...as it is written...On the third day he will raise us up, and we will live before him.
What is raised up?
Life from seed. Plantlife, as it rises out of the ground. Indeed, the seed proves to be foundational throughout scripture, pointing to the most important seed, of Israel, of Mashiach, and man in him.
As an aside, there is a possible allusion to the cross in the vertical and horizontal dividing of waters.
The seed was there from day 1, buried in the ground, buried in the waters of miqwah, eagerly awaiting, hoping, expecting...for the light of YHWH to appear, and the removing of all that hides that which provides life. Then, life was revealed out of the ground from which it was hidden, springing from the bondage of the ground into the spaciousness of the atmosphere above. It so happens that the word 'y'shua' concretely means 'spaciousness'.
Beneath the literal layer, it all indeed points, as Yeshua himself said, to himself, speaking of his death, burial, and resurrection on the third day.
Ronen
Very cool Ronen. I think the idea of "A third day" and "A fourth day" is definitely something to think about.
Specifically, what do you think the reason for adding "THE" to the sixth and seventh day would be? How would those two days interact with the others which do not have the definite article "the"?
Quote from: Seth on December 12, 2013, 09:43:00 PM
Very cool Ronen. I think the idea of "A third day" and "A fourth day" is definitely something to think about.
Specifically, what do you think the reason for adding "THE" to the sixth and seventh day would be? How would those two days interact with the others which do not have the definite article "the"?
Shalom Seth,
I wrote this in an earlier post...
QuoteThe completion of his מלאכה (work done by sending his word as a messenger) is emphasized by the first use of the definite article in day 6. This is then followed by the continual completed state of שבת (ceasing) pictured as 'the' seventh day
but will add a little more to it from Shemot 16, which adds witness to this.
Notice that when Israel was told to gather for each of 5 days, they are referred to without ה.
יום ביום, not היום בהיוםThen YHWH said to Moses: Behold Me causing bread from the heavens to rain for you. When the people will go forth they will pick up
a day's matter in its day, that I may probe them, whether they shall go by My law or not.
(Exo 16:4)
In the next verse, however, he does not say ביום ששי (a sixth day), but rather ביום הששי (the sixth day).
And it will come to be on
the sixth day when they prepare what they are bringing in that there will come to be a duplicate amount over that which they are picking up day by day.
(Exo 16:5)
Then, regarding shabbat, he again uses the definite article ה, when he writes:
Six days shall you pick it up, yet on
the seventh day, the sabbath, none shall come to be on it.
(Exo 16:26)
Most know about the set apart condition then of shabbat, the 7th day. The 6th day is also important, because it represents the completion of the work done during the 5 days prior to it. It is rightly called the day of preparation, for it anticipated the 7th day shabbat.
On another level, we can see then that man was given 6 days in which to spend it however he needed to or wanted to, to work, rest, etc. Man is not told he has to work 6 days, but is given those day to do so. The Hebrew does not say man must work 6 days, but that whatever work he does must only be done during those 6 days in which he is given. The 6th day however, is different because in it all work must be completed...none can be left over for the seventh day. In that sense it is different from the previous 5 days. The 6th and 7th days are linked together in that way.
On yet another level, we can see that man (the last and crowning point of his creation) is made, not on a 6th day, but on
the 6th day. It was that for which all creation eagerly awaited, the defining mark of his creation, and upon that completion he gave man shabbat for him to rest in, setting the example on that first shabbat. Man, and creation itself, would be incomplete without it.
Likewise, Mashiach is our rest, given for us to rest in him. He gives definitiveness (ה) to our existence. Just as that first shabbat did not have an evening and morning to end it, so to Mashiach would provide the true rest for us which will never end.
At least this is what has been given to my understanding at this time.
Ronen
I definitely understand where you are going with regards to the deeper meaning of the 6th day and the 7th day (ie 6th day represents completion of the work and the 7th represents resting from the work). In fact, I see all kinds of references to the Law and Israel there.
For example, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. As I have said in a previous post, that there is ample evidence to suggest that the term "heaven and earth" represents the structure of government, namely Israel (ruling class "heaven" and common class "earth"), which is why God refers to the judges of Israel as "Gods" not in the literal sense, but in the sense that they judged the "earth" below them, the non-judges.
So when God created heaven and earth it was without form and void, and dark. The light was the Law dividing the day from the evening, and the light is to see with: exposure. That's what the law did, exposes sin to the sinner, shines upon things which are done in the dark.
For 6 days God works (creating this this first "heaven and earth"), but he rests on the 7th day, Christ representing the resting of the Sabbath. So when the New Heaven and the New Earth are created, they were without form and void, but the light which God calls into being goes to the inward part shines a light unto the darkness from within the heart, rather than from external works.
------------
Concerning the literal creation, though, what I am wondering is what the significance of the definite article "the" has to do with the literal aspect, if anything. In other words, do you believe that ALL 6 days are not necessarily in order from that perspective, or do you believe - again concerning the literal creation - that the 6th day is the one that occurs in a latter part of the creation?
In other words, with your understanding, do you believe there is no way to scripturally tell which order the creation was made literally, just that God is saying I did all these things in certain days, but not necessarily in this order, so that you can see a picture of Christ?
Quote from: Seth on December 12, 2013, 06:45:03 PM
Quote from: eaglesway on December 12, 2013, 06:37:42 PM
To me it is literal, as periods of time, but even so - it is clear that there were no 24 hour days before the sun and the moon and the stars were created. The word, yom, gives no indication of the exact duration of the "day" it refers to since yom, throughout the scriptures is used to refer to periods of time with various durations.
It seems to me that God is using the literal creation but explaining it in a mysterious way. Even if the "yom" is a long period of time, what does that say about how plant life in the third "day" engaged in photosynthesis without the sun on the fourth "day?" This would make the earth older than the sun by thousands/millions/billions of years. The plant life would have to subsist on a source of physical light coming from a mysterious source. We can always defer to the miraculous for an answer, but if so, it's equally valid to question whether or not God even intends for us to take Genesis 1 as a sequential, literal account.
I definitely agree that it is mysterious and I also know it contains many layers of truth in metaphor, however, I really dont mind deferring to the miraculous, since everything surrounding the pre creation relationship of the Father, The Son, the Angels etc, is miraculous. Since God is the source of all physical science and biological science through the active agent of Jesus Christ (without Him nothing came into being that came into being....all thing hold together in Him....He is before all things that in all things He nmight have the pre-eminence).
For instance, it would be completely reasonable that the light that comes forth from stars, such as the sun, to give life to plants- existed in a more ambient form before the creation of stars themselves as a distribution system for light.
I don't have any problem with people who see the creation story as subject to what we know presently in science, but i personally see what we presently know in science as finally beginning to catch up with the creation story :o)
Quote from: eaglesway on December 12, 2013, 11:15:18 PM
For instance, it would be completely reasonable that the light that comes forth from stars, such as the sun, to give life to plants- existed in a more ambient form before the creation of stars themselves as a distribution system for light.
But if you look at the creation story (from a linear perspective), the stars are placed in the sky on the fourth day not before that. And in fact verse 15 says "And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven
to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
This is all the fourth day. So, from a linear perspective, there is no reason to believe that there was light "upon the earth" until the sun, moon and stars were created. That means that, if we insist on a linear perspective, it means that for millions, or billions of years, the plants lived either without light at all, or light from some other physical light source (other than the sun, moon or stars) that God created on day one.
I have no problem deferring to the miraculous to fill the gap, but to me, I think that makes a non-linear approach stronger since it would not need to make such a claim.
Actually that logic is not failsafe, because of our limited perspectve- but it is reasonable, I am not saying it isnt. i am just saying I look for my solutions to incorporate both the direct and the indirect interpretations of the writings. I do not limit them in ether sense, since i assume that they are TRUE, as a starting assumption.
For instance, if light was created as the first act of creation- we have no way of knowing in what way is was shining upon the earth through the third yom. Most certainly it could have been available naturally as well as spiritually, and that possibility(or any other possibility) is beyond our knowledge. Any authoritative assumption precluding or insisting upon it would be simply a possibility rendered as a surety.
I believe from the instant light was created all things were in the light. The waters were separated from each other because, as wav theory is teaching us, everything acts like water the smaller the particles get.
We still don't know why that proton doesnt spin off that nucleus either. I think it is because "All things hold together by the power of His word" "because by faith we know that the worlds were framed by the Word of God".
Quote from: eagleswayActually that logic is not failsafe, because of our limited perspective- but it is reasonable, I am not saying it isn't. i am just saying I look for my solutions to incorporate both the direct and the indirect interpretations of the writings. I do not limit them in ether sense, since i assume that they are TRUE, as a starting assumption.
I am totally on board with you concerning the Genesis 1 account insofar as other scriptures make it clear that God created all things. By those scriptures, I can tell that the Genesis 1 account has literal components in it.
The thing to consider is in what WAY is it literal? Or, how is God using the literal aspects of creation in Genesis 1 even if he is diverging from the literal also. If we compare it to a house, I think what Ronen is saying, if I am not wrong would be this:
You build a house this way: first lay a foundation, then raise up the walls, then add glass windows, then build the roof, install carpet, then paint it.
The Genesis 1 account would read this way roughly:
I built a house in 6 days. I placed windows, one day. I poured a foundation, a second day. I painted the house, a third day. I installed a roof, a fourth day. I raised up walls, a fifth day. I installed carpet, a sixth day.Now why would I structure it that way? Maybe the order of: windows > foundation pour > house painting > installing a roof > raising walls > installing carpet, while technically not in the actual order contribute to a metaphor I am creating to teach something else not having to do with the actual house.
I certainly believe that the creation account is teaching much more than, "God built the house" :o) I love 2 Corinthians 4: 6 For God, who said, "Light shall shine out of darkness," is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.
Also 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 but just as it is written,
"Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard,
And which have not entered the heart of man,
All that God has prepared for those who love Him."
10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit(Let there be light!); for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God(darkness covered the face of the deep). 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God(the Spirit hovered over the waters). 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words(waters above separated from the waters below).
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him(without form and void); and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. 15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one(heavenly bodies/lamps to shine light on the earth). 16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.
Jeremiah quotes it when speaking of the carnality of the nation Israel,
Jeremiah 4:22,23 " For my people is foolish, they have not known me; they are sottish children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge. I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.
It is one of the richest fields in the Word in which to dig. IMO tho, it is still categorically dependable, definitely miraculous, and thoroughly beyond our abitlity to completely encompass it intellectually.
Quote from: Seth on December 12, 2013, 10:53:08 PMConcerning the literal creation, though, what I am wondering is what the significance of the definite article "the" has to do with the literal aspect, if anything. In other words, do you believe that ALL 6 days are not necessarily in order from that perspective, or do you believe - again concerning the literal creation - that the 6th day is the one that occurs in a latter part of the creation?
In other words, with your understanding, do you believe there is no way to scripturally tell which order the creation was made literally, just that God is saying I did all these things in certain days, but not necessarily in this order, so that you can see a picture of Christ?
That is a debatable answer, which is based on the assumption that God created all that he did IN six days (regardless of length). One thing to consider is that the scripture does not say that God made the heaven and earth in six days.
Look at Shemot 20:11 and 31:17 closely, in particular 31:17. If he wanted to say in 6 days he made heaven and earth, he would have started like this:
בששי ימים עשה...in six days he did make...
Instead he said:
כי ששי ימים עשה...for six days he did make...
This provides further proof that all that he did was for, not in, six days, because it is on THE sixth day that man was created, and shabbat for him. All of what took place on each of the days was for someone, for Adam.
It appears as though the Creator was having these things recorded in such a way as to communicate the beginning of the overarching theme of the entirety of scripture,and not, in my opinion, as an appealing to the scientific mind, or western linear thinking of chronology. For those back then, and for us if we understand Hebrew thought, the creation story becomes easy to remember, and we can pick out what is most important. I believe wholeheartedly that nothing of true scientific fact contradicts scripture, but I do not believe that science and reason was at the heart of why he communicated what he did.
My understanding, therefore, is that he is either not describing the literal order of events at all, or that he is, yet is weaving a storyline and torah through those events by the use or lack of definite articles, and the use of a cardinal numerical expression 'one (as a unity) instead of the sequential 'first'.
That storyline from what I can see is that the pronouncement "very good" could not be made until the end of the sixth day because the sixth day represented the purpose of creation, the 'for' of it. Until man was created, the earlier creations had less meaning, if you will.
This may add to the tension, but, as yet another example...I believe Adam was עשה (made) as the last of his creations, in Bereshiyt 1. Yet he was יצר (formed) first, as the account in Bereshiyt 2 shows. The words used in each instance are very telling, and important for understanding these, not as a contradition, but each having their own torah (instruction) to tell.
Ronen
QUOTE: "My understanding, therefore, is that he is either not describing the literal order of events at all, or that he is, yet is weaving a storyline and torah through those events by the use or lack of definite articles, and the use of a cardinal numerical expression 'one (as a unity) instead of the sequential 'first'."
That's cool. Just like the colors of the rainbow fade into one another. Through the prism(water, the word) made "separately visible" as aspects of one inseparable whole- LET THERE BE LIGHT. Their independent beauty still glorious as manifestations of the one light, like the stone with 7 eyes or the seven spirits of God, the wheels within wheels with eyes all about, etc.
We know of the existence of countless galaxies, of which the milky way is but a drop in an celestial ocean.
So did Father hang every star in every galaxy on the fourth day, or just those in our galaxy?
Creation is such a huge topic and is on such a scale that our puny minds can barely grasp that it would take a light particle 100 billion light years to reach the most distant known galaxy.
To even suggest what Father did and when based solely on the words in Genesis is limiting what we are told in Rom 1:20. Where through every galaxy, to a tiny amazingly complex cell, everything g that can be known about Father can be clearly seen.
In all honesty, how can we not walk through our day without jaws dragging on the ground with dumbfounded amazement of all Father is Words are not enough.They were never meant to be.
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
Its a beautiful "Why?" isnt it? :o)
The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament reveals the work of His hands. (Psalm 19:1)
The heavens declare His righteousness and all the people will see His glory.(Psalm 97:5-7)
For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world have been clearly seen, being understood through the things He has made, even His eternal power and Deity (Romans 1:20)
God that made the world and all that is in it, seeing as He is Lord of heaven and earth dwells not in temples made by hands, nor is worshiped by hands, as tho He needed anything seeing as He gives to all life and breath and all things; And has made of one blood all the nations for men to dwell ,on the earth and determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitations that they should seek the Lord, and perhaps seek after Him tho He is not far from each one of us, seeing as that in Him we live and move and have our being..... Acts 17:24-28
maybe God was just looking for friends :o)
Thanks for this EW. So many try to find and understand Father in the pages of the bible, therefore limiting him to the bound pages within. FATHERS instructions tell us that we can learn of his Love, his creativity and his Wisdom that surpasses knowledge itself.
It's so disheartening I am sure for Father to see so many who are blind to who and what Father really is and for that matter where he is and where we are.
Christ's own instructions can be summed up in two words: LOVE & TRUST. Not of ourselves, but of Father from whom all wisdom comes. He is the bringer of all joy and peace; we must learn of him through everything we take for granted, even the air we breathe and the water we drink.
As hard as this may sound to some, such LOVE and appreciation cannot be found in word. His WORD created everything we know. This is where Father is. THERE is no excuse. ROM 1:20
To many people I know hold a bible in their hand and proudly state: "This is my God."
Jesus foretold that many will claim to have done many things in his name, but he will say he does not know them.
Father is within each of us, when this is realized he can be seen everywhere without.
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
It's been nice talking about this on this forum. Obviously, there is a lack of fear in challenging hot topics here, which is great. The Creation account is a major minefield in the realm of Christianity. It tends to be the first question an athiest would ask, and even Christians can have their faith challenged by it. So it can be an emotional issue for many people, which is why it's nice to have a place to ask questions without alot of fearful blow-back.
Reducing God to our own preferences is a futile exercise :o) But religianity, putting "God In A Box"- packaged for marketing and easy consumption is sort of like trading the "bread of life" for the bleached and sugared bread of man-
fills quick, nourishes little.
If I find the answer to this question;
How will me knowing the intricacies of creation help me to Love my neighbor?
The answer to the above question will help me to gird my loins and
give me the confidence to explain creation to an atheist.
Quote from: dajomaco on December 15, 2013, 03:38:31 AM
If I find the answer to this question;
How will me knowing the intricacies of creation help me to Love my neighbor?
The answer to the above question will help me to gird my loins and
give me the confidence to explain creation to an atheist.
Daj, it won't. We are not given to know, lest we try to do better.
We are called upon to Love & TRUST, knowing that the Spirit will give us what to say when needed.
It is good sometimes to stare in absolute amazement, and be clueless. :dontknow:
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
Quote from: JulieTang84 on December 15, 2013, 07:26:13 AM
Quote from: dajomaco on December 15, 2013, 03:38:31 AM
If I find the answer to this question;
How will me knowing the intricacies of creation help me to Love my neighbor?
The answer to the above question will help me to gird my loins and
give me the confidence to explain creation to an atheist.
Daj, it won't. We are not given to know, lest we try to do better.
We are called upon to Love & TRUST, knowing that the Spirit will give us what to say when needed.
It is good sometimes to stare in absolute amazement, and be clueless. :dontknow:
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
It is good sometimes :o)
I can have a clue as to why I am amazed.
But I will never be amazed at how clueless I am.
I was amazed at how clueless I was when I discovered all my doctrines were flat wrong. But the key is that I was not content with my cluelessness, but pursued.
Proverbs 25:2
It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.
It is the Fathers pleasure to give us the kingdom :o)
Ask and it shall be given, seek and you shall find, knock and the door shall be opened unto you, :boydance:
:dsunny: great thoughts everyone !! Really helps to just ponder all these things
I have always heard there are no atheists when your dying
because death has no POWER IN Jesus Christ and will never fail .
shame comes to the dying , but Living is Gods best buisness ! and Jesus was always about His Fathers buisness !!
I remember once a man whom was angry at God and was always trying to speak against God , saying its just wishful thinking , a very faithful witness
told him , you cannot be angry at God and not believe in Him at the same time ! :winkgrin:
most atheist cannot disprove God , because its faith that makes Gods greatest proving
we pray that faith comes ALIVE within them ! its the most precious thing you can posses and without it you cannot please Him !
I just read this thread today and I enjoyed the discussion. As this is a controversial topic, one of the refreshing things since coming in the UR way of life is that I can hear everyone and I do not have to be against anyone at all and that is the general tone of the tread, a very good discussion from all points of view without the discussion ever having gone down the tubes....
I would like to offer some other thoughts.
One of my now all time favorite books is The Second Death or the Restitution of All Things by Andrew Jukes. He packed some powerful punches is just over 100 pages of text. In my opinion, his analysis was ahead of his time on more than just the Restitution of All Things. Especially his discussion on revelation. The pdf google books version I have is dated 1867, so it is around the time that Darwin put out his theory of evolution, which means he is way before we have any real conflict between science and the scriptures (Just to clarify my position - I do not believe there is really a conflict but more later).
His axiom (and I love axioms) in the first section on the nature of Scripture is that it is a veil as well as a revelation. In page ten (of the book not the file...), he discusses nature as a revelation:
QuoteFirst, as to Nature, which has been called God's formed word, and which beyond all question is a revelation of God. Yet how does it reveal Him? Is it not also a veil, hiding quite as much as it reveals of Him? Is it not a fact that our sense-readings, even of the clearest physical phenomena, such as the rising and setting of the sun, are opposed to the truth, and need to be corrected by a higher faculty?
And in discussing Scripture as revelation on page 13-14:
QuoteThe same is true of Scripture, that is, the written word, which like Nature has gone through six days of change, and like Christs flesh has grown in wisdom and stature. Throughout it is a veil while it is a revelation; and therefore, like Nature, Providence, and the flesh of Christ, it is and must be open to the same reproach, not only of inconsistency, but of setting forth unworthy and even untrue statements of God. For indeed Scripture is a veil, which when taken in the letter, that is, as it appears to sense, makes out God to be just as far from what He really is as Nature and Providence seem to make Him; and yet all the while it reveals Him also, as nothing else has ever revealed Him. For though in Christ's flesh the revelation is complete spite of the veil, its very completeness and compactness keep us from seeing the various parts, which are set before us in Holy Scripture piecemeal (Heb. i. 1.), and in a way that neither Nature nor Providence at present shew Him to us. For the law and the prophets tell us more of God and of His purposes, as to the restitution of all things and the promised times of rest and Sabbath, than Nature yet declares to our present understanding; though indeed Nature may be, and probably is, saying far more to us than any mere human eye or ear has yet apprehended.
The whole section on scripture is mind-blowing. He does discuss progressive revelation but as I need to keep this brief, I would encourage anyone who has not read this book to read it.
Anyway, my two cents. First of all, the quote just above about scripture just could have been about Genesis one and two, could it not! In an earlier part (page five through seven or so), he says that scripture is a divine book by humans and a human book by the divine (That may be my summation...). In fact he discusses how if you dissected Christ's body you would have a human body, but He is not just a mere human to dissect. Just the same, you can dissect the Scriptures just like a human book, but it is not just a mere human book. Jukes says that just like Christ was ultimately incorruptible, just the same the Scriptures are incorruptible.
So without rambling on too much, this is how I see the creation account in Genesis. (Another aside, my wife has gone through a mighty struggle with the relationship between science and Scripture in the last year so we have had a ton of discussions on Genesis). Given Progressive Revelation, it is not a scientific statement at all, nor is any statement in Scripture to be understood as a scientific statement. All of the speech in the Scriptures are [through] human ways of speaking (or a sense reading if you will to use Juke's term). That is why I included the quote above in reference to the sunrise in the east, setting in the west.
I have also been contemplating revelation in terms of humanity in general. I think of it this way, if the creation is really a very long time (I think it was), then when humans began to be on the scene so to speak, there was probably a time when perception was just the senses. If you accept evolution or something akin to change over time, then at some point humans "discovered" themselves (Becoming self-aware (without commenting on sin and such!) I think is right there in Genesis if you will). Then humanity really starts up and here we are!
If Genesis is not a scientific statement, but a veil as well as a revelation, then it is the message that we need as a revelation, not the veil (sense reading or literal). The early Fathers understood it as an allegory (at least Augustine I think).
I hope I make sense...
William
What an amazing read SEER :gimmefive:
Quote:
"The whole section on scripture is mind-blowing. He does discuss progressive revelation but as I need to keep this brief, I would encourage anyone who has not read this book to read it."
Progressive Revelation: This is a new term for me, but I like it. I have read much on how Father has revealed more of Himself through the Scriptures, kind of like peeling an onion. One layer at a time.
This is not surprising because the intellectual and Spiritual knowledge was very different way back then to what it is now. I personally believe it is impossible to gain the same insights from the early Scriptures as those for whom they were first written because SPIRIT changes everything, something that the peoples of old did not have.
Many believe in the BIG BANG, and quite possibly this was the beginning of physical matter as we know it. But let us consider just one small point. Supposing every rock, mountain, planet, solar system and galaxy was compressed into something smaller than an atom. Now just think of what it would take to compress it in such away that when it exploded, EVERYTHING unfolds and falls perfectly in place.
Father is outside of time, for all time is within Him. There is no time in Eternity, so whether the creation of the Universe took Father, 7 billion years, 7 days or 7 nano seconds in "our" time is quite irrelevant. We need not understand it or reconcile it; rather we must see Father in all things and TRUST Him always just as He asked. Though we may find many reason to not, there is NO reason to deny Love.
Well this is what has been progressively revealed to me. :girlheart:
Love Julie :HeartThrob:
Quote from: Seer After Truth on December 20, 2013, 03:17:42 AM
If Genesis is not a scientific statement, but a veil as well as a revelation, then it is the message that we need as a revelation, not the veil (sense reading or literal). The early Fathers understood it as an allegory (at least Augustine I think).
I hope I make sense...
William
Great post, especially above. :iagree:
I don't use the Bible to study science, nor do I use a book of science to reference faith.
And yet I found them compatible.
Quote from: JulieTang84 on December 20, 2013, 05:24:53 AM
Progressive Revelation: This is a new term for me, but I like it. I have read much on how Father has revealed more of Himself through the Scriptures, kind of like peeling an onion. One layer at a time.
Yes, God to me, is multi-layered and multi-dimensional [higher dimensions]. That puts Him far beyond the ordinary reach of our carnal, three-dimensional minds. You can't wrap your mind around God, and that is where faith comes in.
Quote from: Seth on December 17, 2013, 12:16:37 AM
Proverbs 25:2
It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.[/color]
Seth, have you ever considered that a person who can search out a Biblical matter is, in this verse, defined as a king?
With that in mind, let me introduce you all to a group of people who are not well known, who have been greeted by overwhelming silence by the academic establishment, but yet continue to search out the inner workings of the Hebrew language. They also have posted on their site a very unusual translation of the creation story of Genesis.
http://www.thechronicleproject.org/index.html
If the the universe is millions (er now billions) of years old and man and woman came about slowly, per man's theory, then death existed before sin (imperfection).
Jesus, the light of course was created/proceeded straight out from God, the only one straight out from God, so close, as to share His essence, character and substance.
But the creation account is of the universe, and we know the angels were created before the cosmos, for they clapped at its creation.
Why do we compare God's Word to man's understanding? If one is inaccurate, which would it be?
Even for physical, yes literal, or we have no basis for faith if nothing be literal (thus of a lower understanding??!! Say what?!)
Matter of course is energy/light. Day 1 - light
But before that, the earth, yes God says earth created first (accepting man's assertion and theory is causing a great falling away/ has caused)
Light, evening, morning, time, first "yom"- literal day
Firmament and waters above and below (elements?) - space - 2nd yom
Earth/land and waters on earth, plants, grass, trees - 3rd yom
Sun, moon, stars - 4th yom
Creatures which fly and creatures which swim - 5th yom
Beasts, creeping creatures, cattle, man&woman - 6th day - work done as the light, Jesus, the rescue was built into all from the 'beginning'.
Actually I think it possible sin existed before man. Depending on what the pre-creation of Adam world actually was. The fact that God spoke to Adam about the consequences of "eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" before he fell and the fact that the adversary, who depending on how you believe- either fell from amongst the stones of fire when iniquity was conceived in him or perhaps was created as the deceiver, nevertheless in either case there was rebellion/sin/chaos in the cosmos before Adam fell into it.
It is quite possible that the garden served as an insulated bio-spiritual germinator for mankind until the point where God's plan to inject futility into the "perfect" system so that imperfection could allow "light to shine out of darkness", the revelation of Christ the redeemer to all the ages of creation- allowing for a greater perfection - "where much is forgiven there is much love"; and love being the greater perfection into which all that went before would be swallowed up, gathered together into one until God becomes all in all.
It is SO mind bogeling and I am glad we can only glimpse it now, lest we somehow reduced God into the box of our perceptions about things we are are way too small to conceive.
32 For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.
33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!
For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor?
Or who has first given to Him [m]that it might be paid back to him again?
For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory throughout the ages and beyond. Amen.
Quote from: Lazarus Short on December 26, 2013, 08:08:36 PM
Quote from: Seth on December 17, 2013, 12:16:37 AM
Proverbs 25:2
It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.[/color]
Seth, have you ever considered that a person who can search out a Biblical matter is, in this verse, defined as a king?
With that in mind, let me introduce you all to a group of people who are not well known, who have been greeted by overwhelming silence by the academic establishment, but yet continue to search out the inner workings of the Hebrew language. They also have posted on their site a very unusual translation of the creation story of Genesis.
http://www.thechronicleproject.org/index.html
Awesomeness!