George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
The one that sourced the light on days 1-3.
God.
The only difference is that I disagree that a rotating earth is required.
Genesis 1 made more sensible and scientific
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
God.
The only difference is that I disagree that a rotating earth is required.
Wick Stick
Well-known member
I gave a short list of works that contain such... Daniel, Revelation, 1Enoch, Jubilees, Jasher... I originally tried to post links, but the forum disallowed it because I don't have enough posts.
I'm not making a case AGAINST a literal interpretation. That's a fool's errand - a negative premise cannot be proved.
Rather, I am making a case FOR a particular interpretation. I am showing that my interpretation is logical, grammatically possible/probable, consistent with the culture of the people who wrote it, aligns with history reasonably well, and fits into a larger context of the Bible harmoniously.
At the end of the day, if I am successful, the person reading this will be able to say, "either of these interpretations could be correct." And they will have their own choice to make about what they want to believe.
Jarrod
And I could provide a longer list of examples where "day" means exactly what it says. However, I would much prefer a discussion involving evidence. :up:
Then our position remains justified regardless of whatever evidence you bring.
When you have some evidence, let us know.
We could do the same thing for any nonsense. I'm not interested in discussing what is possible; we prefer evidence.
6days
New member
There are no examples in all the OT (Hebrew) to support your case. And there are hundreds of examples of the word 'yom' used in conjunction with a number, (Or in conjunction with a word such as morning) and the examples ALWAYS are referring to a normal day night period.
God even defines the word for us...
Gen. 1:5 "God called the light "day" and the darkness "night." And evening passed and morning came, marking the first day."
Interplanner
Well-known member
6days,
Dr Ross shows several.
You admitted one just today about "in that day you (Adam) will die."
What you need to do to clear things up is give a summary interp of how there was not our star/sun until day 4 but there was evening and morning from day 1. Do you understand what that means about celestial mechanics? Have you ever read how "evening" and "morning" on some of our planets is several years because of how they turn in relation to our star/sun? Years sometimes.
Don't you dare say "God's word says so." With the kind of information given, it has nothing similar to the declaration that Jesus was virgin-born. You have to have a realistic explanation of 'tohu wa-bohu' and you have to have a realistic explanation of the kind of light meant on day 1.
Dr Ross shows several.
You admitted one just today about "in that day you (Adam) will die."
What you need to do to clear things up is give a summary interp of how there was not our star/sun until day 4 but there was evening and morning from day 1. Do you understand what that means about celestial mechanics? Have you ever read how "evening" and "morning" on some of our planets is several years because of how they turn in relation to our star/sun? Years sometimes.
Don't you dare say "God's word says so." With the kind of information given, it has nothing similar to the declaration that Jesus was virgin-born. You have to have a realistic explanation of 'tohu wa-bohu' and you have to have a realistic explanation of the kind of light meant on day 1.
Wick Stick
Well-known member
Wow. Ok. I have been citing resources from the beginning, but I guess you're not willing to look up/at the evidence in the list of resources that I gave you.
At any rate, I really don't have much interest in debating young earth creationists about their dogma. I'll try to appreciate your zeal, and bow out of that conversation.
Interplanner - thanks for your thoughtful post. Hopefully you will have some use of some of the comparative texts I mentioned earlier. I will leave you a couple questions, in case you had not previously considered them.
Do the "toledoth" verses in Genesis introduce the various sections, or are they colophon statements? And what does that tell us about the authorship of Genesis?
The prophet Ezekiel makes repeated references to the story of the Fall in Genesis, naming both Pharoah and the king of Assyria as "trees in Eden" and the King of Tyre as a "covering cherub." Is Ezekiel taking poetic license, or does he actually interpret Genesis as a metaphor?
Jarrod
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Living is the process of dying because death is a part of life as we know it.
Adam began the process of dying that very day he sinned until the dying process brought him to his last breath. Adam became trapped in the death cycle.
Please see Answers in Genesis article on this at:
https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/genesis-2-17-you-shall-surely-die/
or, Adam and Eve were rematerialized, incarnate celestials, immortal by way of "the tree of life", arriving on a previously fallen evolved earth, the worlds new spiritual rulers who would eventually succumb to the suggestions of the crafty beast that they assert their own will and not Gods. That would explain the reality of what we have discovered, and why Cain was afraid of people outside of his parents tribe, how he found a wife among the Nodites.
But Caino, if you use the mind God gave you instead of the mind the perfect men of the church downloaded for you, their God created in mans own image will dip you in a lake of fire, put bugs and plagues all over you and torment you for an eternity!!!!!!
Aren't you afraid? Don't you believe the writings of the church men who killed Jesus??????
errrrrm, no! :nono: I never have believed things that are unholy and untrue.
Of course with God, nothing else is required. However, it makes no sense to insist that the Earth cannot have been rotating and physics dictates that it must have been.
rainee
New member
Hi.
I haven't read all of the posts here but the first page told me a whole lot, I think.
And I would cut right through everything if I could right now and tell you The Bible does not need to make friends with science.
And I believe that must be a shocking thing for any intelligent modern person to say but, oh dear oh dear, it is man who grows and changes not God. So science, which is evidence of man's mind, is going to grow and change and be wrong and get some things corrected that were wrong, and be wrong and corrected again and again - a hundred million trillion times if he lives long enough or hasn't already passed that mark.
But the Bible is written so that we who have faith know what to believe.
To Tell a Believer having faith is not as important as something else simply because momentarily you think the moon was whacked out of the earth billions of years ago or some other popularly held science theory that eventually gets destroyed by more science discoveries is not the smartest advice, do you think?
rainee
New member
True, it's not God who evolves it's mans understanding of God. But since the writings of man became the writings of God, the growth of mans understanding of God has been stunted. The same church politicians have even convinced man that to challenge them represents a failure of faith.
Interplanner
Well-known member
If you can, try to find F. Schaeffer's NO FINAL CONFLICT booklet. Not because of science details which may need updating but to show that the Bible makes every effort to be true to history, to archeology, to fact, to 'what is there.' It is not a separate type of knowledge when it talks about ordinary things like 4 rivers in "the East" or 'tohu wa-bohu' or a 400 foot vessel known as the ark.
I now have Caino on ignore so I don't know what that fruit loop is saying! :doh:Hi Dear
You're on a real roll aren't you?
6days
New member
Dr. Ross compromises on the gospel. He has NO examples.
What I said earlier...
"Yom has the same variety of meaning that 'day' does in English. Its easy to determine the meaning by the context.
For ex... 'In my fathers day, it took 3 days of fishing during the day to fill the boat.'
The word is used 3 times with 3 different meanings in one sentence....yet, its easy to understand the meanings because of context. In fact, God even defined the word to make it easy for you.
Gen. 1:5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning--the first day
The word 'day' is associated with a number, or defining words such as evening and morning, hundreds of times in the OT. In every instance it refers to a normal day...NEVER a longer period of time.
Dr Peter Barnes, lecturer in church history at the Presbyterian Theological Centre in Sydney. He wrote: “…if God wanted us to understand the creation week as a literal week, He could hardly have made the point any clearer…. "
James Barr, Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University, former Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford.
"Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience
Interplanner
Well-known member
So God set up a practice light source before our sun? Why didn't he just make the sun on the 1st day?
I don't know what you mean about Dr. Ross on examples. That's all I remember was examples. Try day of the Lord. Most Bible literalists live or die on the ability to say that that day could be a thousand years.
Please stop pasting things over and over.
The question remains: where is your complete statement about 'tohu wa-bohu' and where are the quotes about it from those who make Gen 1 so very clear?
I don't know what you mean about Dr. Ross on examples. That's all I remember was examples. Try day of the Lord. Most Bible literalists live or die on the ability to say that that day could be a thousand years.
Please stop pasting things over and over.
The question remains: where is your complete statement about 'tohu wa-bohu' and where are the quotes about it from those who make Gen 1 so very clear?