Genesis 1:1-2

Originally posted by sonship
RJ do you believe [b]Genesis 1:31 spoken concerning God on the sixth day ?

"And God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. And there was evening there was morning the sixth day." [/b]

Yes, I have said many times that I believe God over man.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, I have said many times that I believe God over man.

When did "everything" that God had made become not "very good" after the sixth day?

Originally posted by sonship
When did [b]"everything" that God had made become not "very good" after the sixth day?[/b]

Yes, after man sinned and God cursed His creation.

Originally posted by whodey
Watch my video spanky.

You might get learned a bit.

oh, you mean the youtube disproving the entire scientific community and countless evidence from various fields?

i think i will pass.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, after man sinned and God cursed His creation.

So everything became not very good only after the curse was uttered by God in Genesis 3:17 ?

"Cursed is the ground the ground because of you ..." (3:17) .

So only AFTER that moment everything that God had made was no longer "very good" (2:31) ?

Now I am not trying to corner you for embarrassment. But you are going to understand how some of us think about this matter. And you are not simply going to dismiss this thinking as following Atheists or being Darwinian.

I'm going to understand your thinking and you may understand mine.
So please answer - Is it that everything that was pronounced as "very good" on the sixth day only became not "very good" after God uttered the curse in Genesis 3:17 ?

Originally posted by sonship
So [b]everything became not very good only after the curse was uttered by God in Genesis 3:17 ?

"Cursed is the ground the ground because of you ..." (3:17) .

So only AFTER that moment everything that God had made was no longer "very good" (2:31) ?

Now I am not trying to corner you for embarrassment ...[text shortened]... ixth day only became not "very good" after God uttered the curse in Genesis 3:17 ?[/b]

When I was a child in Sunday School I was told that God does not make junk. I still believe that to be true. I believe the writers of the Holy Bible were inspired of God, so when it records that all that God made in those six days of creation were very Good, I believe it. I don't know how I could be clearer. Don't you believe the inspired word of God?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Whic

When I was a child in Sunday School I was told that God does not make junk. I still believe that to be true. I believe the writers of the Holy Bible were inspired of God, so when it records that all that God made in those six days of creation were very Good, I believe it. I don't know how I could be clearer. Don't you believe the inspired word of God?

What is very clear then is that the words BARA and ASAH (create and made ) cannot be in all cases completely equivalent.

God MADE the earth in six days, says Exodus 20:11.
If MADE and CREATE are totally synonymous then it would be that the earth in a state of "without form and void" would have been "VERY GOOD" (Gen. 1:34)

Since it wasn't very good YET, though He CREATED it, He had to WORK with it until He could pronounce that what He did the making with was indeed, now, "very good".

If CREATED and MADE were exactly in all respects equivalent then there would have been no reason for God to do anything with the earth in a state of waste and void (Gen. 1:2). It would have ALREADY BEEN "very good" in that state.

I care about so-called "Creation Evangelism" too, to an extent. I am careful to say that the word of God says God MADE - working with pre-existing stuff, the heavens, the earth, and all that is in them in six days.

That's really what it says. It really does not say that God CREATED the universe in six days.

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] When I was a child in Sunday School I was told that God does not make junk. I still believe that to be true. I believe the writers of the Holy Bible were inspired of God, so when it records that all that God made in those six days of creation were very Good, I believe it. I don't know how I could be clearer. Don't you believe the inspired word of God ...[text shortened]...
That's really what it says. It really does not say that God CREATED the universe in six days.

Yet this is somewhat aside from my question about exactly WHEN did the "very good" world become no longer "very good". Your reply was general - when man sinned and God cursed the ground.

If an enemy of God, a slanderer, a liar, a twister of God's words, a subtle tempter, a sinner, a rival to God, adversary to God, lurking, waiting for the first opportunity to bring sin and death into the world, was in the Paradise garden -

1.) Was that "very good" ?

2.) If not, WHY not?

And if it WAS very good that such a creature was in Eden's garden BEFORE Adam sinned and God cursed the ground, I'd like to know WHY you think it WAS "very good".

I think you have to take up one position or the other. Which interpretation would you like to stand with ? Why don't you answer before I tell you how I would answer.

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] When I was a child in Sunday School I was told that God does not make junk. I still believe that to be true. I believe the writers of the Holy Bible were inspired of God, so when it records that all that God made in those six days of creation were very Good, I believe it. I don't know how I could be clearer. Don't you believe the inspired word of God ...[text shortened]...
That's really what it says. It really does not say that God CREATED the universe in six days.

Creation and make go together in the case of God. God creates the design in His mind and then creates the materials to make it. So there is no need to create or make a big deal about it.

Originally posted by RJHinds

Creation and make go together in the case of God.

Here is how they go together - "CREATED and MADE" (Genesis 2:2,3)

"And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made."

When did God create? - "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".

And when did He finish making, working over what was created? He did this by the sixth day -

"For in six days God MADE the heaven and earth, the sea and all that is in them and rested on the seventh day ..." (Exodus 20:11)

So God created and God made and in between "the earth became waste and emptiness, and darkness was upon the face of the deep." (Gen. 1:2)

And I cannot insist that I know precisely how long ago it was when God created the universe. But I know God did not create it waste (Isaiah 45:18) -

"He did established it [the earth]; He did not create it waste ..." (Isaiah 45:18b)

And I think what you call making a big deal about it, I call "cutting straight the word of God."

And Genesis 1:1 did not say in the beginning God created the DESIGN in His mind. It says He created "the heavens and the earth".

God creates the design in His mind and then creates the materials to make it. So there is no need to create or make a big deal about it.

You call making a big deal out of it. I call it carefully examining what the Scripture actually says.

Including - " He is the God Who formed the earth and made it; He established it; HE DID NOT CREATE IT WASTE ... But He formed it to be inhabited ..." (Isaiah 45:18b)

And thus we can understand that "And God saw everything that He had made, and indeed, it was very good." (Gen 1:31)

If waste and emptiness had been "very good" then He could have rested before making over the earth and heavens in six days.

Originally posted by sonship

Creation and make go together in the case of God.

Here is how they go together - [b]"CREATED and MADE" (Genesis 2:2,3)

"And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made."

When did God create? - "In the beginning God created the heavens and ...[text shortened]... ]"very good" then He could have rested before making over the earth and heavens in six days.[/b]

Genesis 1:2 just indicated that the earth was not finished and ready for habitation immediately, but light had to be made available and the land needed to appear out of the water that covered the earth. God allowed additional days for this to be completed before it could be considered a good creation.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Genesis 1:2 just indicated that the earth was not finished and ready for habitation immediately, but light had to be made available and the land needed to appear out of the water that covered the earth. God allowed additional days for this to be completed before it could be considered a good creation.

I read this in Donald Whitcomb's YEC book "The Early Earth". That was as detailed an argument for that interpretation that I know. He spent a lot of time to present his case with a Dallas Theological Seminary Old Testament expert.

Duane Gish and Donald Whitcomb are good brothers. But I don't follow them on this view of Genesis which you now repeat.

I appreciated the arguments which you are repeating here, and with which I am familiar. But the expounding of men like Witness Lee, Watchman Nee, G.H. Pember, Author Custance, Donald Barnhouse, Joseph Rothram, and some others I found more persuasive.

Yes, just taking Genesis 1 alone we might well consider that it is just a matter of God not finishing His work, which is not entirely wrong. Sure, He was no finished as verse 31 tells us.

It is right what you say. But not the entire matter. In light of the whole rest of the Bible there is more to the picture. We simply are not told more of the picture all in one place.

The record there concerns more than creation. It encompasses spiritual warfare and God's salvation.

The dry land coming up from beneath the waters on the THIRD day, for example, is more than just a record of creation. It is a record of Christ's resurrection overcoming death.

Why could not the land come up on the second day or the fourth or fifth day? The land appearing out from under the death waters is a symbol of the resurrection of Christ. And the resurrection of Christ is not just a matter of God not being finished in His work. It is a indication of God OVERCOMING the damage, and opposition of His enemy Satan who has the might of death.

So I would not say your interpretation of God simply not being finished, is wrong. I would say it is not the fuller picture. We are just enlarged in our view of Genesis 1,2 in light of the whole rest of God's revelation.

The abolishment of the sea in the eternal age indicate something MORE is signified by the sea. It is not just a matter in Genesis of God only not being finished.

The abolishment of night and darkness in the New Jerusalem in the eternal age is indicative of the darkness being something more than just God not being finished.

Rather than weaken the Gospel of Christ as you say, our view actually strengthens the view of the Gospel.

Originally posted by sonship
I read this in Donald Whitcomb's YEC book [b]"The Early Earth". That was as detailed an argument for that interpretation that I know. He spent a lot of time to present his case with a Dallas Theological Seminary Old Testament expert.

Duane Gish and Donald Whitcomb are good brothers. But I don't follow them on this view of Genesis which you now repeat ...[text shortened]... an weaken the Gospel of Christ as you say, our view actually strengthens the view of the Gospel.[/b]

so you make everything in the old testament appear as a symbol of something jesus did.


slapping lamb blood on doors that one time when god killed a bunch of egyptian children to prove he could? symbol of salvation through the blood of christ. it certainly isn't that the angel of death is too incompetent to be able to get a list of who lives where and just check stuff off that list.

land appearing out from under the death waters is a symbol of the resurrection of Christ.

noah's flood? salvation through genocide? i don't know. i am confused.


so is genesis a metaphor or it actually happened how is described? did god create the world in a certain way so that 6000 years later sonship could point out all the little hints that suggested jesus was coming to save humanity? sort of like spoilers to a movie's ending?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi

so is genesis a metaphor or it actually happened how is described?

False dichotomy.

" It is EITHER metaphor OR History ".

False dichotomy.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi

so you make everything in the old testament appear as a symbol of something jesus did.

Many things are. Many things point to Christ and the church.
Christ is really the kernel, the center of the whole Bible.

Christ, Christ, Christ. He's the center of the whole Bible.
Learn that and learn it well.

slapping lamb blood on doors that one time when god killed a bunch of egyptian children to prove he could? symbol of salvation through the blood of christ. it certainly isn't that the angel of death is too incompetent to be able to get a list of who lives where and just check stuff off that list.

This thread is mostly on Genesis 1.

I will open up a thread on the Passover perhaps latter.

land appearing out from under the death waters is a symbol of the resurrection of Christ.

There was no life until the land came up out from underneath the death waters. This is about natural life.

But the deeper meaning is about the life of God which God intends to dispense INTO man's being. There is no dispensing of the life of God into man apart from the Redeemer, the Son of God, dying and rising in resurrection.

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has REGENERATED us unto a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." ( 1 Peter 1:3)

You see REGENERATION there is to be born again. That means in ADDITION to the natural life you received from natural birth, there is compounded into your innermost being the Person of Jesus as your eternal life.

Through Christ's redemptive death (the Passover Lamb) and the resurrection we can be born again unto a living hope.

You see, the Apostle Peter says "a living hope" because the hope is actually a Living Person who enters into our spirit and our heart. God can LIVE within your spiritual being through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The dry land coming up on THE THIRD DAY is a heavy hint of Christ's resurrection. And just as LIFE is not mentioned in Genesis 1 until the dry land appears so we cannot receive God as divine life except through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

noah's flood? salvation through genocide? i don't know. i am confused.

The ark of Noah saved the family from the flood.
The flood saved Noah from the wicked generation.

You had to be IN the ark to be saved. You could not be hanging on the outside after the doors were shut.

And you have to be IN Christ by believing into Him in order to be saved from eternal (rather than temporal) judgment. And you cannot be hanging around, hanging on to, hanging after .. to Jesus when there is no more opportunity for you to believe INTO Jesus.