Spirituality
05 Aug 13
Originally posted by sonshipWith all the things that God did in a creation day of 24 hours it could seem like a thousand years or to evilutionists, millions or billions of years.
Well, before I read many other's opinions on the passage, I understood it to mean that to God a long time to us might be not that long from His perspective.
In other words, not being mathematically exact, a long period to us, ie. a thousand years, to God seems like one day.
Conversly, (and most people I don't hear mention this) - one day can be like thousand years.
It may be a thousand years by the time you finish reading this post.
The Instructor
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
09 Aug 13
1 edit
RJ, I don't think you responded yet. Give it a shot. I want to know how you think.
Did the plants that Adam eat DIE as a result of him picking them and having them for a meal ?
If so, how does that square with the belief that through Adam's sin only, death came into the world ?
If the plants died then you may have to modify your concept about Romans 5:12. Death coming into the world there must not include the dying of plants Adam was instructed to eat.
09 Aug 13
Originally posted by sonshipThanks for replying, it was an interesting post to read. I don't really have anything to add, except that a part of the purpose of the narrative seems to be to establish the Sabbeth, so the presence of a week is necessary to the narrative.
[quote] The narrative ends each day with "And there was evening and there was morning - the nth day." I don't think there's any reason to interpret the narrative as indicating anything other than the usual day night cycle. Whether Genesis should be interpreted literally is another thing. Especially since the sun, the moon and the stars aren't created until t ...[text shortened]... Thanks for it anyway, as I check it out. I have no comment on it.
Yes, I was aware of the difference, I don't think the "how long were the days" question actually came up in the real court case; so I had to refer to the play.
Regarding the Egyptians I agree that it doesn't prove anything, I could just have been looking at the wrong era. Also, Wikipedia is hardly an infallible source. If the Biblical pharaohs were Hyksos rulers then the absence of evidence is understandable.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
09 Aug 13
Originally posted by sonship
DeepThought,
There isn't really a gap in Genesis at the start, God creates light, separates it from the dark and calls light day and dark night.
You are of course assuming that God saying [b]"Let there be light" is God CREATING light.
However, what it says is "LET ... there be light". You cannot really insist that nowh ...[text shortened]... id tell us many things.
I will go over your comments a second time latter.[/b]
An additional factor to consider is that there is, I believe, an unspecified interval of time between the beginning and the dark time in which the seer observed that the earth was waste and void. There is some unelaborated history of the universe in that interval of unspecified time.
Just from reading Genesis we might not notice this. Other portions of the Bible indicate this as a valid understanding of the beginnings of creation.
I have heard this before. My understanding , if I remember correctly, is the word "without form and void" which is in the Hebrew, tohu va bohu, which means "in vain" not sure about that either. Nevertheless, else where in the bible there is a verse that says God does not create anything in vain.
Isa 45:18
For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else
KJV
Anyway, if I remember, the word "was" does not have an English translation and it should have been translated "became".
Now if you read the verse this way, "The earth (became) without form and void (in vain)"
So, whatever light consist's of had already been created, so God simply said "Let there be Light", meaning he didn't have to create it again.
The point is, that there is an unspecified amount of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3...
The theory was that there could have been thousands of years here where the rebellion in heaven occurred, Satan was cast down and he tampered with God's creation, messed with genetics which could explain the dinosaurs, etc.
Just more to ponder, I would not bet my life on it, but it is food for thought.
10 Aug 13
Originally posted by sonshipAnd God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so.
RJ, I don't think you responded yet. Give it a shot. I want to know how you think.
Did the plants that Adam eat [b]DIE as a result of him picking them and having them for a meal ?
If so, how does that square with the belief that through Adam's sin only, death came into the world ?
If the plants died then you may have to modify your concept ...[text shortened]... h coming into the world there must not include the dying of plants Adam was instructed to eat.[/b]
(Genesis 1:29-30 NKJV)
Notice what God gave for food. So it was okay to eat herbs and the fruit of the trees. But we were not to destroy the plants themselves. We were not to pull the trees up by the roots, so that it would die when we ate the fruit. Cows can eat grass and we can mow our yards without killing the plants.
So the problem all started when man decided not to listen to God's instructions, but to do as they saw fit. God did not tell Adam to pull the plants up by the roots and eat the roots, like we do today, did He? So I see no contradiction with what Paul said in the letter to the Christians in Rome.
The Instructor
10 Aug 13
3 edits
Originally posted by checkbaiterYou need to depart from the false teachers you are listening to.
[quote]
An additional factor to consider is that there is, I believe, an unspecified interval of time between the beginning and the dark time in which the seer observed that the earth was waste and void. There is some unelaborated history of the universe in that interval of unspecified time.
Just from reading Genesis we might not notice this. Other
Just more to ponder, I would not bet my life on it, but it is food for thought.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.
(Genesis 1:1-5 NKJV)
The above all took place on day one of the creation of the physical heavens and the earth. Verse two states the earth was "without form" and means that the forming of the earth was not completed at this time. It goes on to explain that this is because it was all under water and there was darkness over this water covered earth. It also states that it was "void" of life. From Strong's Concordance, we see that the Hebrew word translated "void" has the main meaning of "empty" and therefore, it is telling us that it is empty of any life at this time. But God took care of the darkness problem by creating light on that first day. So the evening (night time) and the morning (day time) was one day.
On day two, God works on the sky or heaven above the earth by putting some water up there.
Then on day three, God completes the forming of the earth so dry land appeared and making it no longer "empty" or "void" of life by making all manner of vegetation.
That is the correct understanding.
The Instructor
