Results 1 to 25 of 165

Thread: Why to NOT take Genesis literally.

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    In the genesis account, is the earth created as a dead, dry world as taught by science?.....or was the earth created with seas already covering the land?
    Genesis chapter 1 and chapter 2 give different accounts of this.

    Genesis 1-- 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. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.... And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

    (After this, on the 6th day-man was created.)

    Genesis 2--These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
    But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
    And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

    There are some who believe that Moses took two different accounts and combined them which is why it seems different from chapter 1 to chapter 2.

    In the end, if you blend the two, then earth was created first (ground, dirt) and then water second. In fact, in chapter 2, it appears that first the ground was created, then seeds were planted, and then the earth was watered--much like we would make a garden.
    I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)--Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

  2. #2
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    I'm out in my shop right now working with the coal forge...but in a bit I will take a break and post...

  3. #3
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Im so cold right now...I can hardly type my fingers are so cold.
    i was outside working and it was snowing....thats how cold it is here.

    So I may have to warm up a bit before I get too deep into how Genesis 1 works with genesis 2...

    But the short answer is that there is no disagreement between Genesis 1 and 2...
    However Genesis 2 does drop back in the story and fill-in a few important details in the creation story.

    genesis 2 does carefully set the stage here,when it talks about the time setting of the story its going to be dealing with.

    its a time in the creation week that was " when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.


    so we know we are going to be dealing with a moment in the story that comes after Genesis 1:1...for it says "when they were created"...so the Heavens and the earth are created.
    as we have already learned, the term "heavens"refers to the stars, like our own sun, so we are going to be dealing with a point in earth's history that comes after the creation of the sun and stars, and the earth as well...

    then the text adds, " Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth[a] and no plant had yet sprung up,


    lets drop back and find out when plants were created ?

    Genesis 1 : 11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation:
    And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

    So now we know we are going to be dealing with a point in the creation story that comes before day 3...


    Next it says-
    "or the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth"

    when is the first listing of water on the earth in the genesis story?
    "darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.



    So we are now getting a clear idea that we are going to be talking about a moment in earth's history that happens after the earth was created, but before the "waters" talked about in Genesis 1:1 had appeared...

    So this is going to be very early in earth's history.



    Now as I said, Genesis 2 is a part of the story that drops back to fill-in some important details of the story that have not been shown yet.
    One such thing now is listed and it has to do with the "waters" that were talked about at genesis 1

    We are now going to learn where the "waters" came from that covered the earth at the start of the genesis story.

    but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground

    So now we learn that the water that covered the earth at the start of the story actually came from inside the earth.
    The translation i posted here says the words "streams" but another correct wording is "a mist"




    So Genesis 1 and genesis 2 are in agreement...with genesis 2 filling in details that we need to more clearly understand the full story.

  4. #4
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    So what does it all mean?

    The answer is, that the Bible is teaching us that the earth was created as a dead and dry world....and that all the water on the earth came from underground.

    and this is where the water talked about at genesis 1:1 (the deep, the waters) came from.





    and oh by the way, this is in agreement with where science tells us water came from too by the way....
    So there is nothing here so far that stands against science.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    So what does it all mean?

    The answer is, that the Bible is teaching us that the earth was created as a dead and dry world....and that all the water on the earth came from underground.

    and this is where the water talked about at genesis 1:1 (the deep, the waters) came from.





    and oh by the way, this is in agreement with where science tells us water came from too by the way....
    So there is nothing here so far that stands against science.
    Your point? I have never disagreed with science and the Bible being congruent. But if it wasn't--this would not matter as well. Science isn't infallible and the Bible is not explicit on exactly how the earth is created. We are not given the details.
    I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)--Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

  6. #6
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    oh,,,I hope I did not make it seem like I thought you disagreed with science...

    But trust me....others, even within my own church family ,do strongly feel that science disagrees...
    Most of my comments are aimed at such a issue.....

    Im actually relieved to understand your position now more clearly.

  7. #7
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    in the opening of Genesis we read that there was "darkness" on the earth...
    Well tomorrow I will address the question of why the earth was in darkness if we know at the start of the story God had already made the sun and stars.

    Why was the earth in darkness if there was a sun burning bright in the sky


    We will learn what the bible teaches as to why this happened.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •