The Creation Account, Another Look

[101G]

Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Let's discuss these two verses for starters. let's zero in on verse 2.

#1. Earth was a water ????????? do we really say planet? my question is, was earth a planet, as we define a planet, or not in the beginning. for the scripture stated, "WITHOUT FORM". so do we really identify earth as a planet in this beginning stage of development?

my second question, "was the sun actually shining, or was it even form yet. scripture stated, it was dark, no sunlight?. I have hear some scientist say the sun was formed but not yet shining, others, the sun formed but it was a thick cloud around the earth where no sunlight could penetrate to the surface.

for a general discussion we will start right at the beginning, with EARTH. I would like to hear the scientific side as well if any religious point of view.

thanks for your responses in advance.

[benchwarmer]

My assessment is corrected? More like you are doubling down and substituting even more words now.

Care to explain what 'evening' and 'morning' are? You know, the things that are part of a day. Oops, I mean part of a "knowledge and understanding".

It's ironic that you have substituted "knowledge and understanding" into a story that contradicts known reality based on scientific observation.

I've got to hand it to you, you are trying hard to cobble this story together, but the gymnastics required make everything fall apart. At this point, all I've gathered is that you are willing to make up definitions of words to suit your personal interpretation and switch the meaning of these very same words within the same story and context whenever you feel like it.

However, just to see where this goes, let's assume you got it right. The very first thing God does is create knowledge and understanding. So, that means these things didn't exist before right? So God knew nothing and understood nothing until he decided to create these things? You can't come back with human knowledge and understanding because humans are not created yet. Care to explain how God did anything if he understood nothing and had no knowledge?

First thanks for the question,

Your welcome, but you actually completely disregarded the most important one at the end of my post. I assume because it completely toppled your position.

Let's do a quick summary of your word substitution and see what we end up with:

light-> knowledge and understanding
night -> ing
Night and Day? Morning and Evening, One more time.

Evening first, why? it's metaphorically referring to the building of structures not seen, meaning those things that are not visible, Romans 1:20 "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse".

So evening is those things that are not seen, (invisible) the building blocks of thing seen. in the science arena, one might say the atomic or quanta world. (which we are now beginning to discover and understand). evening, the start of making or building something, (that's unknown or unseen) but is understood when completed, meaning understood, or

Brought to light, (morning) seen. and it is to be understood. like when God said, "let the lights be for seasons". in understanding, rotation, tilting of the earth on it's axis's. see once God made something, he have given us the tool of science to discover and "UNDERSTAND" what he has made. so, Once more, Romans 1:20 "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse�.

the two key words in that scripture for this subject are “SEEN� and “UNDERSTOOD� = the WISDOM of God. science is the tool to allow us to "UNDERSTAND" his work.

The atomic structure that you cannot see, (evening), is now made visible of things that what you now can see, (morning). understand, metaphorically speaking one must understand what God did, starting from, or (the formation or making of something) at first NOT seen, (evening), but when morning comes, or the completion of what's being made, (in that period of time), one can see, (morning) the completion of that system. The scriptures are beautiful.

So let me make it very clear to you. Evening, the "start" of what one cannot see, (darkness), IGNORANCE, meaning the lack of information, the UNKNOWN in layman's terms “in the DARK�. so what is unknown is NOW “UNDERSTOOD� or seen or is brought to LIGHT, (morning) made visible.

Supportive scripture, John 1:5 "And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not�

One do know what comprehend means, ... right? to grasp mentally; understand. To understand something one need knowledge of it, well this is where “WISDOM� comes in at. ……..

thanks for the question.[/quote]

[benchwarmer]

My assessment is corrected? More like you are doubling down and substituting even more words now.

Care to explain what 'evening' and 'morning' are? You know, the things that are part of a day. Oops, I mean part of a "knowledge and understanding".

It's ironic that you have substituted "knowledge and understanding" into a story that contradicts known reality based on scientific observation.

I've got to hand it to you, you are trying hard to cobble this story together, but the gymnastics required make everything fall apart. At this point, all I've gathered is that you are willing to make up definitions of words to suit your personal interpretation and switch the meaning of these very same words within the same story and context whenever you feel like it.

However, just to see where this goes, let's assume you got it right. The very first thing God does is create knowledge and understanding. So, that means these things didn't exist before right? So God knew nothing and understood nothing until he decided to create these things? You can't come back with human knowledge and understanding because humans are not created yet. Care to explain how God did anything if he understood nothing and had no knowledge?

First thanks for the question,

You're welcome, but you completely ignored the most important bit at the end of my post. I assume because it topples your position.

Let's do a short recap of your substitutions:

Light -> knowledge and understanding
Dark -> ignorance
Evening -> start of what one cannot see
Morning -> made visible

And we'll plug this back in:

3 And God said, “Let there be knowledge and understanding,� and there was knowledge and understanding. 4 God saw that the knowledge and understanding was good, and he separated the knowledge and understanding from the ignorance. 5 God called the knowledge and understanding “day,� and the ignoranceness he called “night.� And there was the start of what one cannot see, and there was something made visible—the first day.

So, according to you:

1) God had no knowledge or understanding before starting creation

2) After God's first 'creation day', knowledge and understanding were made visible.

Which means:

1) God could not start anything since He had no knowledge or understanding before it was created

2) Apparently this knowledge and understanding are now visible things. Yet, there is no actual electromagnetic radiation at this point since you have decided to keep visible light uncreated until day 4.

I'm afraid you just digging the hole deeper and deeper here and not bringing anything 'to light' so to speak. Now you have 2 internal contradictions to deal with that weren't already there in the first story. I thought we were trying to remove contradictions, not create more.

[101G]

First Greeting to all. and hoping all will have a blessed 4th of July.

Now to the business at hand. I have looked over the last few post, "nothing new", so we'll get to man in the creation account.

#1. I believe that the First man was formed on creation day 3, "BEFORE" the grass grew, "BEFORE" the trees grew, and "BEFORE" the herbs grew. as said, I base this on Genesis 1:11-13 and supported by the detailed account of day 3 in chapter 2 verses 4-7

knowing that,

#2. I believe that the One man formed on day 3 is now MADE/CREATED into "ANOTHER" man. for the definition MAN, in chapter 2:7 can be translated by the KJV as "another" of oneself. this is the bases of Diversified Oneness.

#3. I believe that by God, the Lord Jesus, the forming of the woman is given man the power to reproduce, meaning the creating of the SEXES on day 6. and this power to reproduce was maintain endless without decay. what do I mean here. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, (ENTROPY), was not fully activated for free reign. meaning, that a outside force/POWER greater than ENTROPY restricted this law. this law of ENTROPY is clearly defined in the bible with its effects as SIN when brought forth.


In understanding SIN, and it’s results or effect on the world. We want to make the reader aware of what language we use to identify certain statements. 1. “the Fall into sin�, simply means “DISOBEDIENCE� or “BROKEN FELLOWSHIP� or simply put a none maintaining of fellowship with this GREATER POWER, (GOD). and the effects of this disobedience, or broken fellowship called DEATH, which is the result. natural Death, or in the scientific community, it is referred to as The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, (ENTROPY), which is the universal law of decay; the ultimate cause of why everything ultimately falls apart and disintegrates over time. The bible describes this decay over time as, “the wages of sin, which result in death�. the serpent by lying to the woman and the man, robbed them out of eternal life (NO ENTROPY), by saying, “Ye shall not surely die�. (ENTROPY), NOT at that moment, NO, but over a period of time, (DECAYING), Death, Natural Death, is broken fellowship with this POWER, GOD, which yield the transfer of energy progressively hence the 2nd. Law of Thermodynamics, (DECAY), or what the bible calls “NATURAL DEATH�, or the "WAGES of sin". a wage is a fixed regular payment. so ENTROPY is a fixed regular DECAY, NATURALLY.

Material things are not eternal. Everything appears to change eventually, and chaos increases. This is why the order of this planet as the way it is, ... is in decay, or wearing out, because of entropy/sin. supportive scripture,

Psalms 102:25 "Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands.
Psalms 102:26 "They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed"


Isaiah 50:9 "Behold, the Lord GOD will help me; who is he that shall condemn me? lo, they all shall wax old as a garment; the moth shall eat them up".

Revelation 21:5 "And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

These are just a few scripture stating the condition of the world, before the Lord Jesus makes all thing NEW, without entropy.


but as to man it is this eternal power, GOD, (the Spirit) who maintain the restrictive effects of entropy. understand, the bible was written to us, the fallen line in Adam, this is why we must be in Christ line, "REBORN" of the Spirit, the Second or Last Adam, with eternal life, (NO DECAY or entropy). supportive scripture, 1 Corinthians 15:45 "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1 Corinthians 15:46 "Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual".

there is no more NATURAL death, nor broken “FELLOWSHIP� in the Last Adam.

see our Relationship never changed, only broken fellowship, by our disobedience, it allowed sin, or entropy to enter, or be enacted in this world.

Conclusion: the bible clearly defines the scientific terminology of what we know as (ENTROPY), The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which is the universal law of decay, ..... SIN.

I know that will rattle the scientific sabers in here. I know your response, "it's not so".... (smile). but that's ok.


and to make it better, I'm going to MAKE UP a word to describe what someone said,as to what I was doing, "applying scripture to science". ok, have it your way.

here's the new word,
Christosignosis: (Christo-si-gnosis). the "g" in gnosis is silent. phonetically sounds, {Christo-si-Know sis}. it's the Study of spiritual mysteries revealed by scientific knowledge from God. NOTE: taking “Christ�, like in a Christian, with “si� for true science, to understand the“gnosis�, or knowledge of spiritual mysteries.


Not to be confused with,

Christocentric which is a doctrinal term within Christianity, describing theological positions that focus on Jesus Christ,

Or with,

Christian Science which is a set of beliefs and practices belonging to the metaphysical family of new religious movements.

so thanking you in advance of any corrections, or support.

Peace in Christ Jesus.

this should give the science group something to talk about.

[Neatras]

[Replying to post 112 by 101G]

Why have you dropped all of the debate topics you've raised and are being countered on? Why aren't you responding to my point that the scientific consensus is that birds evolved from dinosaurs? Simply asserting that birds came before dinosaurs is not adequate because you've provided no evidence-based support. Given that, the creation account is demonstrably wrong, and therefore this tangent you've created is entirely unjustified. We are still discussing a different topic here, and changing the topic abruptly to wax on about a creation myth here completely undermines the spirit of debate. How am I, an aspiring debater, supposed to feel engaged to the topic if anyone who is cornered jumps ship and redirects the topic to preach their beliefs from on high?

[Danmark]

Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

This verse alone is enough to convince me the Bible's creation story is ridiculous and comes from a source wholly ignorant of reality. If the Earth was without form it was not yet a planet, yet the imagery includes water and a great depth of it. This is a preposterous image that reflects an ancient belief in a flat Earth that consisted of nothing but a great, landless ocean resting in a giant flat basin covered with a dome of sky.

[benchwarmer]

First Greeting to all. and hoping all will have a blessed 4th of July.

Greetings to you and my southern neighbors about to celebrate July 4. Up here in Canada we already filled the night sky with pyrotechnics on July 1

Now to the business at hand. I have looked over the last few post, "nothing new", so we'll get to man in the creation account.

By "nothing new" do you mean you can't refute any of the counter points brought up? I'll take it that way until shown otherwise.

Keep in mind that when you don't provide any counter debate, anything else you say is essentially ignored. For example, after I read the above, I completely ignored anything that followed, so you basically wasted your time typing it if you were hoping to impart anything to me. I imagine your other debate partners here are feeling much the same.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 112 by 101G]

this should give the science group something to talk about.

Uh ... no. You (yet again) have not provided any reasonable science connection but are just doing more preaching where you present bible verses as if they offer support for something (they don't), then offer up your personal opinion which strays even farther from anything even remotely connected to science (for example, relating "sin" to entropy and the 2nd law of thermodynamics).

So BW is correct that those of us in the "science group" are most likely ignoring what you say rather than seeing it as "something to talk about", because it is completely one-sided (no response to counterpoints you've been presented) and completely unsupported with any type of evidence. If you want to debate the Genesis creation myth, and its interpretation from a science perspective, you can't ignore everyone's comments and simply continue to toss out bible verses and preach the gospel. There are other sections of the website that are more appropriate for that kind of thing.

[101G]

First Greeting to all. and hoping all will have a blessed 4th of July.

Greetings to you and my southern neighbors about to celebrate July 4. Up here in Canada we already filled the night sky with pyrotechnics on July 1

Now to the business at hand. I have looked over the last few post, "nothing new", so we'll get to man in the creation account.

By "nothing new" do you mean you can't refute any of the counter points brought up? I'll take it that way until shown otherwise.

Keep in mind that when you don't provide any counter debate, anything else you say is essentially ignored. For example, after I read the above, I completely ignored anything that followed, so you basically wasted your time typing it if you were hoping to impart anything to me. I imagine your other debate partners here are feeling much the same.

I never seen anything you posted support your stance. all the articles you posted I have seen these already, so again, "NOTHING NEW". now what you posted before I have counted posted. but I'll add a few more.

"Reptile grew feather-like structures before dinosaurs"
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... dinosaurs/
so more finding and research is forth coming which I'll keep an eye on.
but just to the FACT that "birds was here at the time and before dinosaurs tell you they didn't evolved from dinosaurs

"Birds Did Not Evolve from Dinosaurs, Say Evolutionists"
https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/ ... utionists/


"The Myth of Bird Evolution"
https://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Wat ... -evolution

"Did Birds Evolve from Dinosaurs?"
http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/content.cfm?id=3117

see, there are much debate among your own scientist. so i'll stick with the book of Genesis.

PS but thanks in your efforts in trying to rebuke what is said in Genesis.

Next time Adam and Eve having children in the Garden before they had Cain and Able outside the Garden. and prove it scientifically.

untill then....

[rikuoamero]

First Greeting to all. and hoping all will have a blessed 4th of July.

Greetings to you and my southern neighbors about to celebrate July 4. Up here in Canada we already filled the night sky with pyrotechnics on July 1

Now to the business at hand. I have looked over the last few post, "nothing new", so we'll get to man in the creation account.

By "nothing new" do you mean you can't refute any of the counter points brought up? I'll take it that way until shown otherwise.

Keep in mind that when you don't provide any counter debate, anything else you say is essentially ignored. For example, after I read the above, I completely ignored anything that followed, so you basically wasted your time typing it if you were hoping to impart anything to me. I imagine your other debate partners here are feeling much the same.

Aye. Page ten or eleven was basically all posts from me and yet...nothing

[rikuoamero]

First Greeting to all. and hoping all will have a blessed 4th of July.

Greetings to you and my southern neighbors about to celebrate July 4. Up here in Canada we already filled the night sky with pyrotechnics on July 1

Now to the business at hand. I have looked over the last few post, "nothing new", so we'll get to man in the creation account.

By "nothing new" do you mean you can't refute any of the counter points brought up? I'll take it that way until shown otherwise.

Keep in mind that when you don't provide any counter debate, anything else you say is essentially ignored. For example, after I read the above, I completely ignored anything that followed, so you basically wasted your time typing it if you were hoping to impart anything to me. I imagine your other debate partners here are feeling much the same.

I never seen anything you posted support your stance. all the articles you posted I have seen these already, so again, "NOTHING NEW". now what you posted before I have counted posted. but I'll add a few more.

"Reptile grew feather-like structures before dinosaurs"
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... dinosaurs/
so more finding and research is forth coming which I'll keep an eye on.
but just to the FACT that "birds was here at the time and before dinosaurs tell you they didn't evolved from dinosaurs

"Birds Did Not Evolve from Dinosaurs, Say Evolutionists"
https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/ ... utionists/


"The Myth of Bird Evolution"
https://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Wat ... -evolution

"Did Birds Evolve from Dinosaurs?"
http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/content.cfm?id=3117

see, there are much debate among your own scientist. so i'll stick with the book of Genesis.

PS but thanks in your efforts in trying to rebuke what is said in Genesis.

Next time Adam and Eve having children in the Garden before they had Cain and Able outside the Garden. and prove it scientifically.

untill then....

Oh boy...you quoted from answers in genesis? Do you need a primer on what those who have a statement of faith are like, and what that means for you to be citing them?