Creation, Man, Sin: In the beginning.....What?

[polonius]

Regarding sin, JW posted:

No, it was a provision for the Adamic or inherited sin of those that would have or will recognize the value of that sacrifice.

RESPONSE: This subtopic takes the present dialogue in another direction. So much so, that I believe it appropriate to create a separate thread on the legend regarding the Original sin, man's guilt, and any need for redemption.

The founding legend of Judaism written in its present form in 800-700 BC begins with the story of creation in seven days and the relationship between God and man and sin.

In the beginning:

Scientists estimate that the hominid lineage diverged from the ape lineage 5 to 8 million years ago. Homo sapiens, the species to which we belong, has existed for about 100,000 years.

www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat06.html

So at the very onset, we have a vast disagreement between the Bibles seven days of creation account and what science tells us.

Lets, by way of overview, take a brief look at Bible truth regarding mans nature.

It all begins with an explanation as to why things die.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 13 by JehovahsWitness]

Perhaps that's because the first seven chapters of the scripture are themselves fictional in nature.

You have yet to present any biblical evidence supporting this claim.

JW

You expect to get BIBLICAL evidence to support the claim that the BIBLE fictional? How odd.


Polonious.advice was giving us his OPINION.

We need not give evidence for an opinion.
I have the same opinion, by the way.

There is no evidence that the Bible is a source of true stories about the genesis of the universe at all. It's just a bunch of stories that don't at all match up with modern observations.

My opinion, of course.
Do you have an alternate opinion to share with us today?

[onewithhim]

To address your comment on the sun and moon appearing in the heavens, or, "the expanse." In Genesis it says that during the 4th creative "day," God caused luminaries to "come to be in the expanse of the heavens." (Gen.1:14,19) This does not indicate that the sun and moon were created at this point. The first verse in the Bible states: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen.1:1) Thus the heavens---with the sun and moon---existed for an undetermined period of time PRIOR to the processes and events said to have occurred during the 6 creative periods described in the subsequent verses in chapter one.

The sun and moon (and the earth) already existed when "day" one commenced. Now it is set forth how the luminaries existed in relation to the earth.

It is very clear from the text that the earth and water existed prior to the first day. The luminaries are a different matter. You are correct to point out that the writer did not explicitly state that they were created on the fourth day. It seems to be a strange departure in style, however, to claim that the fourth day be the only one without a major actual creative event. Day one, God creates light. Yet, according to you, the luminaries, the sources of light, must have existed prior to him creating actual light. Day two, God creates an expanse, heaven, to separate the water above from the water below. Day three, God creates plant life. Day four, according to you, God creates nothing, but he moves some clouds around so that the lights can be seen. Day five he makes animals for sea and sky. And finally, day six he makes land animals.

Why do you say that a "day" of creation has to be 24-hours in length? The Jews didn't even use 24 hours as a measurement of a day until after the Babylonian captivity. So Moses wouldn't have meant 24-hours when he wrote Genesis. If you insist that a "day" must mean 24 hours, what does it mean in Genesis 2:4?

Wow, that is truly increadible. The Jews, unlike every other society on earth, didn't have a word for the alternating period of light and darkness that happens every 24 hours, until after the Babylonian captivity. Where did you pick up that little gem of wisdom?

This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.

It could very well mean day, a day prior to the first day, when he created light. Or it could very well mean an undetermined period of time. This day has no evening and morning.

"Evening" and "morning" merely mean an ending and a beginning.

Studying the Scriptures, there is no indication in them that the Hebrews used hours in dividing up the day prior to the Babylonian exile. The word "hour" found at Daniel 3:6,15; 4:19; 5:5 in the KJV is translated from the Aramaic word sha'ah, which literally means "a look," and is more correctly translated as a "moment." The use of hours by the Jews, however, did come into regular practice following the exile. Apparently the early Babylonians used the sexagesimal system based on a mathematical scale of 60. From this system we get our time division whereby the day is partitioned into 24 hours (as well as two periods of 12 hours each), and each hour into 60 minutes of 60 seconds each. This is the reasoning found in Insight on the Scriptures by the WTS, Vol.I, p.593. I'll do more research into the sexagesimal system & the Babylonians. If you find any information regarding the Jews and their division of days, please point me to it.

Another interesting bit of info: There were times when the Hebrews used "day and night" to mean only a portion of a solar day of 24 hours. E.g., IKings 12:5,12 tells us of Rehoboam's asking Jeroboam and the Israelites to "go away for three days" and then return to him. That he did not mean three full 24-hour days but, rather, a portion of each of three days is seen by the fact that the people came back to him "on the third day."

Anyway, I do not believe the "days" in Genesis mean literal 24-hour days. That mightily contradicts what science has discovered about the age of the earth. I don't believe that the Bible contradicts science, and I feel that the explanations I have given you about the light appearing are sound.

[McCulloch]

"Evening" and "morning" merely mean an ending and a beginning.

Thank you for your unsupported opinion on this. The author makes quite a point of describing the separation of light and darkness; day and night. Then he says evening and morning, the first day.

Studying the Scriptures, there is no indication in them that the Hebrews used hours in dividing up the day prior to the Babylonian exile. The word "hour" found at Daniel 3:6,15; 4:19; 5:5 in the KJV is translated from the Aramaic word sha'ah, which literally means "a look," and is more correctly translated as a "moment." The use of hours by the Jews, however, did come into regular practice following the exile. Apparently the early Babylonians used the sexagesimal system based on a mathematical scale of 60. From this system we get our time division whereby the day is partitioned into 24 hours (as well as two periods of 12 hours each), and each hour into 60 minutes of 60 seconds each. This is the reasoning found in Insight on the Scriptures by the WTS, Vol.I, p.593. I'll do more research into the sexagesimal system & the Babylonians. If you find any information regarding the Jews and their division of days, please point me to it.

Thank you for that wonderful and interesting research. But it entirely misses the point. It matters nothing if the days were divided into 24 hours or 120 zipteqs. The pertinent question is whether the days mentioned in Genesis 1 refer to actual days or are a metaphor for something else. To me the discussion of light following darkness and evening and morning are indicators that the author intended actual days.

Another interesting bit of info: There were times when the Hebrews used "day and night" to mean only a portion of a solar day of 24 hours. E.g., IKings 12:5,12 tells us of Rehoboam's asking Jeroboam and the Israelites to "go away for three days" and then return to him. That he did not mean three full 24-hour days but, rather, a portion of each of three days is seen by the fact that the people came back to him "on the third day."

I'll grant you this one. The six days of creation could have been five and a half.

Anyway, I do not believe the "days" in Genesis mean literal 24-hour days. That mightily contradicts what science has discovered about the age of the earth. I don't believe that the Bible contradicts science, and I feel that the explanations I have given you about the light appearing are sound.

Thank you for your feelings on this issue. I do not share those feelings. The writer of Genesis contradicts what science has discovered on numerous issues not just the age of the earth.

1. Flowering plants before sea life
2. Skyborne life forms before land animals
3. A universal flood during human history
4. Humanity's origin being between the Tigris and Euphates
5. Racism based on the three sons of Noah
6. Language divisions based on an event in Babylon

[myth-one.com]

"Evening" and "morning" merely mean an ending and a beginning.

Thank you for your unsupported opinion on this. The author makes quite a point of describing the separation of light and darkness; day and night. Then he says evening and morning, the first day.

Studying the Scriptures, there is no indication in them that the Hebrews used hours in dividing up the day prior to the Babylonian exile. The word "hour" found at Daniel 3:6,15; 4:19; 5:5 in the KJV is translated from the Aramaic word sha'ah, which literally means "a look," and is more correctly translated as a "moment." The use of hours by the Jews, however, did come into regular practice following the exile. Apparently the early Babylonians used the sexagesimal system based on a mathematical scale of 60. From this system we get our time division whereby the day is partitioned into 24 hours (as well as two periods of 12 hours each), and each hour into 60 minutes of 60 seconds each. This is the reasoning found in Insight on the Scriptures by the WTS, Vol.I, p.593. I'll do more research into the sexagesimal system & the Babylonians. If you find any information regarding the Jews and their division of days, please point me to it.

Thank you for that wonderful and interesting research. But it entirely misses the point. It matters nothing if the days were divided into 24 hours or 120 zipteqs. The pertinent question is whether the days mentioned in Genesis 1 refer to actual days or are a metaphor for something else. To me the discussion of light following darkness and evening and morning are indicators that the author intended actual days.

Yes, I agree.

Another interesting bit of info: There were times when the Hebrews used "day and night" to mean only a portion of a solar day of 24 hours. E.g., IKings 12:5,12 tells us of Rehoboam's asking Jeroboam and the Israelites to "go away for three days" and then return to him. That he did not mean three full 24-hour days but, rather, a portion of each of three days is seen by the fact that the people came back to him "on the third day."

I'll grant you this one. The six days of creation could have been five and a half.

Anyway, I do not believe the "days" in Genesis mean literal 24-hour days. That mightily contradicts what science has discovered about the age of the earth. I don't believe that the Bible contradicts science, and I feel that the explanations I have given you about the light appearing are sound.

Thank you for your feelings on this issue. I do not share those feelings. The writer of Genesis contradicts what science has discovered on numerous issues not just the age of the earth.

Specifically regarding the age of the earth, there is no conflict between the Bible and scientists.

Here is the description of the original creation:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

That states nothing about the time required to originally create the heaven and the earth.

Therefore, it does not contradict any estimates of the earth's age -- scientific or otherwise.

The recreation of an earth which had become formless, void, and dark was said to have taken six days.

[McCulloch]

Specifically regarding the age of the earth, there is no conflict between the Bible and scientists.

Here is the description of the original creation:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

That states nothing about the time required to originally create the heaven and the earth.

Therefore, it does not contradict any estimates of the earth's age -- scientific or otherwise.

The recreation of an earth which had become formless, void, and dark was said to have taken six days.

I stand corrected. How about I substitute the age of the continents which the writer of genesis clearly puts within the six days of creation?

[myth-one.com]

Specifically regarding the age of the earth, there is no conflict between the Bible and scientists.

Here is the description of the original creation:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

That states nothing about the time required to originally create the heaven and the earth.

Therefore, it does not contradict any estimates of the earth's age -- scientific or otherwise.

The recreation of an earth which had become formless, void, and dark was said to have taken six days.

I stand corrected. How about I substitute the age of the continents which the writer of genesis clearly puts within the six days of creation?

Sure, let's here about the continents.

[JehovahsWitness]

You expect to get BIBLICAL evidence to support the claim that the BIBLE fictional? How odd.


Polonious.advice was giving us his OPINION.

Yes, and that's fine, but this is a debating forum so it is not I believe unreasonable to request information as to what said opinion (read belief) is based on. Since this is TD&D it is not unusual to request biblical input to validate the opinions given.

It's also perfectly acceptable to state "That's just what I believe, I have no evidence to back that up". It's all good.

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

The recreation of an earth which had become formless, void, and dark was said to have taken six days.

Where, pray tell was this "said"?

[myth-one.com]

The re-creation of an earth which had become formless, void, and dark was said to have taken six days.

Where, pray tell was this "said"?

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. (Genesis 1:1-2)

Verse one defines a complete creation! In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. This marks the end of the original creation!

Many believe this first verse of Genesis to be a general statement that God created the heaven and earth in the beginning and the following verses describe this same creation in more detail.

However, verse two differentiates the original creation in verse one from the re-creation begun in verse three. Verse two describes the earth as without form, void, and dark after it was created in verse one.

On the other hand, every single item created by God beginning in verse three was seen to be "good" after being created. Likewise, beginning in verse three, God created dry ground and vegetation so the earth was not without form and void. He also created light so the earth was not dark as stated in verse two. Consequently, verse two only describes the creation defined in verse one as everything created after verse two was seen to be good by God. Good is not the same as without form, void, and dark. So verse one definitely describes a separate creation process from that begun in verse three.

No one knows exactly when "In the beginning" was. Whenever it was, God completely created the heaven and the earth originally at that time according to verse one!

After that original creation, the earth was without form, void, and dark.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that God ever made anything that was not originally created as good! Then why does verse two state that the earth was without form, void, and dark after being created in verse one?

Other translations of the original Hebrew text indicate that something occurred and the earth had reached this state. For example, the New International Version of the Bible renders the same verses as follows:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty; darkness was over the surface of the deep... (Genesis 1:1-2)

That is, God originally created the heavens and the earth good in verse one, and over a period of time the earth had become formless, void, and dark. Between verse one and verse two a period of time obviously occurred. Based on current scientific estimates, the time period between verse one and two was approximately 4.55 billion years. This is the current estimated age of the earth.

The following "creation" described in detail beginning with Genesis 1:3 is actually a re-creation of a decimated earth originally created in verse one. It is this re-creation that can be traced back to approximately 6,000 years ago. This idea that the creation described in detail in Genesis is actually a re-creation of a decimated earth is supported by other scripture verses:

Thou sendest forth thy spirit (And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters Genesis 1:2), they (mankind) are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth (beginning in Genesis 1:3). (Psalm 104:30)

What caused the original wonderfully created earth to degrade to the conditions as described in verse two? Sin and rebellion against the commandments of God produced chaos.

Who was there to sin?

Satan and angels under his authority:

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. (Jude 1:6)

In the re-creation, God created mankind to eventually replace these rebellious angels.

Man is Plan B.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 39 by myth-one.com]

I would agree with what we read in Genesis 1:1 is a separate and complete outline of something, distinct and different from the various staged processes we read after it.

You seem to be implying that the description of the earth being initially "without form, void etc" meant is was "bad" (as opposed to good) and therefore ??? here I'm confused, therefore not part of the intial creation referred to in verse one?


JW