Bible Study - Understanding Genesis 1 & 2

I respect that view. But I think I come down on a Destruction / Reconstruction view of Genesis (aka the Gap Theory). And I have written a lot about it on this forum already. Maybe you read some of the debates already, maybe not.I adopted a Gap understanding of Genesis 1:1,2 after a careful reading of G.H. Pember's book "Earth's Earliest Ages." Some years latter I realized that Young Earth interpreters were very adamant about their understanding. I did not want to read only a critique of that view from a Gap perspective. So I read carefully through The Young Earth to hear YEC fairly from "the horse's mouth" so to speak. I think the author's name was Whitlock(?). Anyway he's a strong one for the young earth interpretation of Genesis.Though I found many of his arguments thoughtful and deserving reply, he was not able to convince me that Pember's exposition of Genesis was faulty. So I have remained an Old Earther.I don't necessarily like these labels. But I use them here to communicate succinctly.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Why?
What causes you to conclude that God did tell us/you/anyone anything?Seriously - I don't get it.
How can anyone treat this sort of mythological story as fact? Why does anyone need to? Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Straggler,Can you name me a known scientific FACT that contradicts any passage of Genesis 1 & 2?I said FACT, known FACT. Maybe there is one. I ask you to tell me of the science FACT and the biblical verse which it clearly contradicts.I'm out here on a limb now. What unquestionably known science fact contradicts which verse in Genesis? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Again, Genesis 1:1-2 is a preface and narrating us the condition of the DEEP before the creation heaven and earth got started in the beginning. Here's why....Note: Insertions are mine for clarity of thoughts and metaphor:"In the beginning God Created the heaven (Air) and the Earth (Ground). And the Earth (Ground) was without form, (Dust) and void; (Empty) and darkness (Death) was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."Genesis 1:3 shows us the Light was brought forth into physical world from the invisble realm of the Father - to turn the condition of the deep (empty) from darkness (death) to light (life).It was the brightness of the glory of the Lord God, the Son, that WAS brought forth -- when God spoke the "Word" in the beginning and said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT". John 1:1; Gen. 1:3All things were made through/by him: and without the True Light (Son) was not anything made that was made. Because, in him (Jesus) is Life. John 1:3-4Jesus/YWHW, the Son, provided the Light in heaven in the beginning (ALPHA) of creation as he would also be the one providing the Light at the end (OMEGA) - New Jerusalem - (Rev. 21:23)."And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb (Jesus) is the light thereof." Revelation 21:23God Bless

quote:

---

I respect that view. But I think I come down on a Destruction / Reconstruction view of Genesis (aka the Gap Theory). And I have written a lot about it on this forum already. Maybe you read some of the debates already, maybe not.

​

I adopted a Gap understanding

---

Dear jaywill,Gen. 1:6-8 shows that the Firmament or Heaven, as God calls it in Gen. 1:8 was formed on the 2nd Day.The narrative of Gen. 1:1-2 is speaking of the period BEFORE the 1st Day.Jesus, the True Light, speaks of this time, in the Garden of Gethsemane: Note: GLORY is brightness - a physical form.And now, O Father, glorify thou Me with Thine Own Self with the Glory which I had with Thee BEFORE the world was." John 17:5If one believes that In the beginning God created the Heavens (Plural) BEFORE the 1st Day, then the Words of Jesus would seem to be in error.If one believes that the 1st Firmament or Heaven was formed on the 2nd Day, then it would agree with Jesus, and would show that Jesus came into the World Before the 1st Heaven was formed.God BlessEdited by 4Pillars, : No reason given.

Again - Why? I cannot name a known scientific fact that contradicts the Koran, the story of Gilgamesh, Homers Illiad or the books of the Lord of the Rings if you choose to interpret them in the "correct" way.Even those who proclaim to take the bible "literally" seem to spend an awful lot of time debating what the "literal interpretation" (isn't that an oxymoron?) of the bible actually is. That is in fact the very premise of this thread!!!!!!If there is even such a thing as a "literal interpretation" my question remains - Why do you need one? Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

I understand your metaphors. But the metaphors for Genesis which do occur in the New Testament concern real opposition against God rather than benigh nonexistence.The light shines in the darkness in John's gospel regards real Satanic oppostion to God not benigh non-existence.The light shining out of darkness and into our hearts in Second Corinthains is related to Satan's damage on fallen man's mind.So the NT metaphors do not tie Genesis 1:1,2 to God acting against benigh non-existence but rather Him countering real spiritual warfare and opposition.This is in tune with a well expounded Destruction / Recontruction intepretation of Genesis. I think the same applies to the New Jerusalem. There will be no more curse and there will be no more night (in the city). It is not benigh darkness. It seems as darkness as a symbol of the curse of sin and death.Before the earth became waste and void another economy existed. The nature of it may be very foreign to what we know today. But that world under that deputy authority was judged by God and ruined. Upon is ashes God created a new order and put it under man and said "let THEM have dominion" (My Emphasis).So there is a gap and interval between God creating the heavens and the earth in 1:1 and the condition of the waste and voided earth in 1:2. The details are given scantly latter in the Bible. We are told what God deems important for us to know only. For instance, the ancient pre-history of the deputy authority which became the arch enemy of God. That is Satan, the Day Star, the Anointed Cherub that covers. The negative opposition was sourced in Satan's war against his Creator.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Straggler,Somehow this excuse has never much impressed me. You can say "Well I know of no known science fact that contradicts the story of the Three Little Pigs or of Little Red Riding Hood either."Okay, to be fair you mentioned the Koran and Homer. Well, I have not yet finished the entire Koran. So I can't comment.I think if you say "How can you believe this stuff ???" you should be able to point to real and definite contradictions with known science facts.Do we know God did not create the heavens and the earth?So if you don't know for a fact that God did not create heaven and earth why drop your mouth at me and say "How can you believe this stuff?"Don't you see science inching closer and closer in the last years to some kind of catastrophy theory? Killer comets. Killer volcanoes. Killer Gas. Different ways of trying to explain where all the life went from the previous world.The earth was waste and void it says in Genesis 1:2. Many readers see destruction there to a previous order before the present earth was so ordered for man's dominion. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

That's a fair point - "How literal is literal?"I think 24 hour days is intended from the way it reads. But those were days of restoration and further creation. Man was a new entry into the universe. And I would have a real problem with not understanding that there was historically a FIRST man and a FIRST woman.I think the New Testament would collapse if there were no first man Adam and first woman Eve. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Then, collapsed it is. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Well......yes. Exactly. This argument very much mirrors the argument - You cannot disprove God so it must exist.
There is no reason to believe something because I cannot disprove it and there is no need to take seriously one myth any more than any other simply because I cannot show how your particular interpretation is inconsistent with known science. Especially given that your interpretation was formed with the benefit of science having already established the facts on which your interpretation is itself based.There are numerous scientific facts (age of the Earth, age of the universe, evolution, BB theory etc. etc.) that are contrary to accounts within Genesis (depending on which "literal interpretation" you choose to make). This whole forum has been setup to explore them and the controversy surrounding them.The fact they are denied as facts because they are contrary to deeply held faith based positions is exactly why this forum exists. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Several points in there so let me try to take them in something like order. There is no real indication that folk 2000-4000 years ago were much less sophisticated than today. Aristotle lived only shortly after the Torah was likely put in final form, the Vedas are far older than the Torah, and the writings of the eastern thinkers revolve around the concept of contrast and contradiction. You can also look at other religions of other areas and find remarkably sophisticated concepts.But you do not have to take my word for it. The first few chapters of Genesis are really short. Read them yourself. The God of Genesis 1 is amazing. He creates simply through the Word, through will, and She stands back from all of Creation, aloof, transcendent.The God found in Genesis 2 and later is quite different. He is personal, creates with his hands, breathes life into them. He names rivers, creates gardens. This God walks and talks with His Creations, is vitally and personally involved. But He is also somewhat inept. Even though He created male and female for the animals, for some reason He does not seem to know what would be a fit helpmate for Adam, so He brings the different animals for Adam to try.These are two totally different images of GOD, one transcendent, one personal.While an Orthodox Jew might disagree with the analysis of the Documentary Hypothesis, they were hardly black and white thinkers. If you have a chance, read some of the Talmudic discussions.Often we tend to confuse intelligence, sophistication and knowledge. The Bible is the product of all three, but one key to understanding it is knowledge. Knowledge is additive, cumulative. The authors of the Bible may well have been as intelligent, as sophisticated, as we are today, but they lacked over 2-3000 years of knowledge. From their knowledgebase, many of the errors in the Bible simply were not as obvious as they are today.Consider the ideas of the waters below and waters above. From there knowledgebase, if you dug a hole, water accumulated in the bottom. In addition, there were places where water bubbled up from below ground or out of a rock face. Also, rain fell, but no one ever saw water go up.These are facts, evidence. They saw water below, and water above. How is that possible?Their answer to the former was the Fountains of the Deep. There had to be water below the surface they walked on.But what held up the water above? The obvious answer was that there had to be some canopy, the Firmament, a solid dome that held back the waters above with windows that could open or close to let the water through.From our knowledgebase today we can say that they were wrong, but from their perspective the answers fully explained the evidence seen.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Unquestionably known science fact: green plants require sunlight.In Genesis, green plants were created on Day 3:

quote:

---

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

---

The sun was not created until Day 4:

quote:

---

Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Gen 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Gen 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

---

That's one. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I don't think so.You have the integrity of a certain man - Jesus of Nazareth to deal with.He has His hands on too much truth. He has a kind of built up approvedness which is not easy to ignore or dismiss.H.G. Wells was no fundamentalist Christian. He championed evolution theory in fact. But even H.G. Wells said that when Jesus opened his mouth his words embraced the whole world. In other words Wells acknowledged that great wisdom was to be heard from Jesus Christ.Now if Jesus takes Genesis seriously, then I have to consider that very significant. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Well then maybe I'm out of place here as a person of bibilcal faith.But heck isn't half your fun showing how stupid we are for believing the Bible?Oh, Big Bang may tell us how. It does not say WHY. So to supplement Big Bang and all that good science stuff, I need the Bible.Unless you think the why is not important. I think it is. And the Bible tells us about the "eternal purpose" of God. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning