Can the Big Bang and Genesis Both Be True?

[disciple]

Hi Alan, I hope you are well.

I think in your desire to get across what you believe to be true you have overlooked
a few things. First, we should realize that before creation there was nothing. You
and I cannot visualize “nothing”. For example, empty space is not “nothing”, I hope
you understand what I mean. So let’s look at Gen 1:14-19 but first we should look
at the definition of the word “firmament” taken from Easton’s Bible Dictionary.

Firmament from the Vulgate firmamentum, which is used as the translation of the Hebrew raki'a . This word means simply "expansion." It denotes the space or expanse like an arch appearing immediately above us.

With that in mind let’s look at the following verses.

14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. 16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

In Gen. 1 the “heavens” is the space or expanse where God placed everything else
He created and it’s very obvious when you read vs. 14-19 with that in mind.

[alanmolstad]

Hi Disciple !

I just read your post above, and I did not really understand what you were pointing to?

Perhaps if you posted a bit more about your "firmament" point and maybe this time I would catch what you refer to in what I have said I can understand and respond better.


Be that as it may, I should write something so as to move the conversation along, and so let me address a few ideas over the next few posts-



What I have been taught, and now saying is the following:

That first I should talk about the word "Firmament'.
Many times in the writings of people as to the meaning of this term we find that they always seem to come out with another term they like - "dome"

This is an error.

The word "Firmament" should not thought of as if the writer of the Genesis story had in mind a great hard-shell dome over the earth.
The idea of a type of "hard shell dome", be it made of fired clay or some type of an "invisible covering", was just not a common way for the people at that time to understand their world.

Their understandings had to have some type of common concept that people could grasp.
Something that all of them could see true in their daily lives.

This is why the term "Firmament" was not talking about a hard-shell dome over the earth, (because no one lived inside a hard shell ) rather it is talking about a "tent".

The word firmament is dealing with the common and historical concept of a tent known to all the people who would study and recite the Genesis story for generations and generations because they all lived in tents and they all understood the concept of light poking though the small holes in the tent.

The people at this time understood that rain, and snow came down not just "from" the firmament, it was thought to come "though" the firmament....just the way it came though the tent they lived in...

The concept they had in their minds as to what the Genesis story was saying was understood as being something they all saw true in their own lives whenever it rained or snowed.


BE THAT AS IT MAY -
Once the story was written down and placed into the Holy Text it also gives us the opportunity to study the story today and we also can come to an understanding of the story that does still agree with the historical understanding, yet also can be understand in the context of our modern point of view as well.

I don't see any need to force the story to be in conflict, just because we gave up living in tents.

Thus when I see the word "Firmament" I can understand that to the historical student of the past, the story it meant to them a term that talked about the "fabric" of the universe over the Earth.
And although I have a greater understanding of the universe due to the advancement of science, I yet can still understand the term "Firmament as also pointing to the very fabric of the universe!


So although science has truly advanced over recorded history yet no contradiction is found between how we understand the text, and how it was written to be understood.

[disciple]

Hey Alan,

My point is that the Hebrew word raki'a means a space or expanse, so in the beginning where there was "nothing" God created
a space (the heavens) where He placed everything else He created.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by disciple

Hey Alan,

My point is that the Hebrew word raki'a means a space or expanse, so in the beginning where there was "nothing" God created
a space (the heavens) where He placed everything else He created.

.........................................

I can only go with what the Bible says was created first "In the beginning".
That is what I teach on, that the Bible tells us very clearly what God created first in the beginning.

The Bible does not say "Before the beginning, God created the..."



Now if a person feels that the "firmament" was part of or included within the "Heavens" created first in the beginning?..I would not have issue with that.

If a person wants to understand that the "firmament" was well within the understanding of being considered "the heavens: that thats fine I would think.

[DennisCrane]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

.........................................

I can only go with what the Bible says was created first "In the beginning".
That is what I teach on, that the Bible tells us very clearly what God created first in the beginning.

The Bible does not say "Before the beginning, God created the..."



Now if a person feels that the "firmament" was part of or included within the "Heavens" created first in the beginning?..I would not have issue with that.

If a person wants to understand that the "firmament" was well within the understanding of being considered "the heavens: that thats fine I would think.

I think you're right. We don't have to think about "before the begining" as it has not been documented in the Holy Bible. And we don't have to judge our Holy Bible on the basis of the knowledge of science that we have now as it is not complete. Holy Bible is THE resource that we should refer when in problem or doubt. It has al the answers, you just have to read with your heart open, not mind.

[Schweigert]

I couldn't articulate it any better than some of the people that already posted. Just want to say that I don't really see anything that puts the Holy Bible and science in a collision course. Both are needed to explain life and eveything around us. Ignore one, and you're only hurting yourself.

[alan]

i agree with you totally

[DrDavidT]

science can exp[lain certain things, like how life works BUT it cannot say HOW God created. The Bible has already done that

[alanmolstad]

Now the other main point that I have been taught and have been talking about on this message forum is dealing with the term "Heavens"


This term "Heavens" has several meanings in the Bible.

I do not wish to try to list all the different meanings as that would tend to sidetrack us, but I will just point out one important thing about the many different meanings to the word that is important to our study of the Genesis story.

That among the correct ways to understand the term "Heavens" is the idea that it is talking about all the things in the sky.

all of them, not just the pinhole lights in the sky we know as stars, but all the other things that we don't even have names for even today.
All that "stuff" up there above the earth is correctly called in the Bible by the one term understood at the time to be addressing all that stuff - "Heavens".


So in other words, if I were writing down the story of Genesis and I wanted to use a term that correctly identified all the stars in the night sky, there really is only one term that does this and carries that intended meaning, and that is the term "heavens".




Now why is this important to our story of the creation order?

The answer is that when I was in a ORIGINS discussion on Young Earth Creationism, taught to me personally by the well known YEC teacher, Mr Ken Ham , he had within his teachings the idea that the Bible says that the first thing God created was the "light".

This formed the base of all his young earth teachings, this idea that God made the "light" first before He had created a 'source" for that light.
This sorta starts the ball rolling for Mr Ham, and from there he has to then justify the idea that he has a "light" before he had a "source" for that same light, and that gets him to the idea that you can have a total contradiction between all known science, and the Bible.

This idea that science was against the Bible forms an unquestioned base of understanding for all that Young Earth creation stands on.
They believe it ......they don't know any better....


I have a different idea.
My idea is to just read what the words of the text actually say, and believe them.
The first thing the Bible actually says God created in the beginning was "The Heavens".

We know for our study that the term "Heavens" can mean "Stars" and so right here at the beginning of the Genesis story we have an account of creation that AGREES WITH SCIENCE!!!!!!