Genesis and Other Creation Myths

[timtofly]

God named Heaven and Earth and they dont appear until the 2nd and 3rd days. Heaven is the hammered bracelet, the firmament placed amidst the waters. The water was there first. And the Earth is the name God gave the dry land when it was revealed from underneath the water. The water was there first, the water was there before God

The hammered bracelet and dry land. Thats what God created "in the beginning". God did not create matter, or the water, or the submerged Earth of Gen 1:2. You're not only replacing the definitions of these words with air and matter, your argument requires us to believe God created Heaven and Earth twice, or even 3 times for the Earth.

Gen 1:1 God creates Heaven and Earth
Gen 1:2 God creates a submerged Earth
Gen 1:6 God creates Heaven again
Gen 1:9-10 God creates Earth again

Now does that make sense? You dont like Young's translation? Here's the NRS:

"1 In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth,

2 the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light."

Gen 1:2 describes the situation before God arrived to create - the Earth was covered by water and darkness. And it doesn't say how long that situation existed.



His translation makes sense



But God didn't create the water and your logic does require us to believe God created Heaven and Earth multiple times. How does God create Earth (dry land) in Gen 1:1, then immediately tell us this dry land was actually a formless void covered by water and darkness, and then later on the 3rd day of creation this not so dry land becomes dry and God names it Earth?

The only way that makes sense is by ignoring what Gen 1:1 says, or at least translating it within the context of the following story and not the first of multiple creations. Now if the Earth in Gen 1:2 is a formless void, was it created that way in Gen 1:1? If so, then the Earth wasn't created in Gen 1:1 because it wasn't dry land yet. That didn't happen until the 3rd day.



Then what form was the Earth in Gen 1:1? "In the beginning" refers to events on the 2nd and 3rd days, but the 1st day saw the separation of light and darkness into day and night - the world was spinning closer to the Sun. But that wasn't the Earth yet, that doesn't appear until later and its sky with its various lights comes next. Thats why the 2nd day creation of Heaven doesn't refer to the Earth's sky, the Earth (dry land) didn't exist yet.

I have repeatedly said that God created matter and air, animals, and humans. I have never said that God created the earth 3 times.

If the earth was without form, it did not need to be created again. God was waiting for the earth to take form, and then he separated the waters.

The first day when God said let there be light, was the first day of the universe, and the earth was not even a globe. It was matter that had no form, until gravity formed it into a globe. This happened when God separated the light from the darkness. This darkness lasted until the morning of the 4th day when the earth was spinning and receiving the light from the sun for the first time. That was the moment the sun started to radiate light.

I am not the one who defined the heavens and earth in verse one as the actual earth and the firmament. That has been the accepted definition for thousands of years. Science had not defined what had happened. That is a very modern thing. I did not change any definitions. I just went back and looked at the other definitions that were available for those words.

The reason that I said that the earth could still be the earth even without form, was from watching the Dr. Who episode where he went back to when the earth was being formed. Even if the earth did not have form and was a whirl of matter, it is still the earth. The reason why it cannot be a spinning globe then without a solar system, is because the sun was still dark, and forming itself. The day was not a normal spinning earth day, until the morning of the 4th day when the faint light of the sun first reached it.

BTW, I am not trying to convince you to accept what I am saying. I don't think that I am trying to "fit" it into modern science either, but showing how they are similar. I also trust that God does not leave us in the dark, but allows us to learn knew things about his creation. The biblehub.com is the online source that gives the Hebrew, along with the English, from the Strong's list of words and their usage in the Bible. I also hold that God is the source of all wisdom, as well as everything else in this universe.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

The reason that I said that the earth could still be the earth even without form, was from watching the Dr. Who episode where he went back to when the earth was being formed. Even if the earth did not have form and was a whirl of matter, it is still the earth. The reason why it cannot be a spinning globe then without a solar system, is because the sun was still dark, and forming itself. The day was not a normal spinning earth day, until the morning of the 4th day when the faint light of the sun first reached it.

Please tell me you're not citing Doctor Who as a source. Please.

 

[Daw]

During ice ages the Bering Strait becomes exposed land the size of a continent. But I'm sure people were making the trip in boats after seas rose, probably even before.

No, it does not become exposed land. Anyway, not any more than Antarctic continent does. So it looks very much like this, making it hard to confidently tell whether it is land or sea. And it looks somewhat similar in winters still.

I doubt many people walked across an iced over Bering Strait... Yet most of the world describes creation in similar terms. Besides, people would have crossed frozen rivers, lakes, ponds, etc, without it becoming their creation myth.

I will take that argument when you find a lake or river taking at least 6 days to cross.

Besides I brought the Bering thing up mainly because it very well fits the concept of light existing without source (dawn developing into dusk without a day an with little to no Sun seen close to the Arctic circle in winter).

The creation of land preceded life, only the Flood could result in sea shells on top of mountains.

No, it definitely did not.

According to the scripture, the flora created was Angiospermae and Gymnospermae (although the latter are trees yielding no "fruit, whose seed [was] in itself", so it is arguable already).

The Thallophyta (much of water dwelling flora), Bryophyta and Pteridophyta (the Carbon Age says "Hi") are not mentioned in the Genesis to be created and therefore could have existed before creation/elevation of land. Unicellular flora surely did.

Same goes to the Fauna created; that covers Chordata only. As with Spruces and Pines, some Mollusca and Medusozoa are also referred to as "fish" in English, so their creation is arguable, too. Arthropoda definitely do not fit the description of what was created, so they were not. Same goes to Bacteria, and, more importantly, Coelenterata, who are known for their land-creating capabilities.

So maybe God is a coral colony, who knows. Given the God's omnipotence, it would be inappropriate to think it is totally impossible whatsoever

Anyway, the planet (or whatever it is under the Genesis concept) was apparently thriving with life long before the dry land appeared (or was created) to be populated later.

Edit: It appears that my passage about fauna was wrong. Studying days 5 and 6 now, wondering why God had it twisted it so much...

 

[Daw]

Wait a second... Fungi... they are neither plants, nor animals. And they aren't mentioned in the Genesis at all. Were they created at all?

Edit:
It also seems that Bacteria have never been created, too. And the lying insects and bats are flying very much against God's will, apparently, as they were supposed to crawl only on D6.

 

[timtofly]

Please tell me you're not citing Doctor Who as a source. Please.

What do you mean "as a source"? I am not claiming the show was right or wrong, nor can one travel back in time, to even know how the earth formed. My point was all the bits and pieces that make up the earth can still be considered the earth. When it says that the earth had no form, with a lot of empty space, what does that look like? Even today the earth is still just an interactive mass of atomic particles, but with form.

The whole argument that is being argued, but not stated, is the point did some being intervene in a natural process, or did it start the process, and then manipulated it. Is it creation of the universe, or an alien in the universe, that only manipulated the earth?

 

[bhavv]

Please tell me you're not citing Doctor Who as a source. Please.

What's wrong with that? Its a perfectly fine source for 'creation myths', and arguably better than the bible.

 

[Berzerker]

I have repeatedly said that God created matter and air, animals, and humans. I have never said that God created the earth 3 times.

If the earth was without form, it did not need to be created again. God was waiting for the earth to take form, and then he separated the waters.

Okay, I think I understand now... The Earth was created in Gen 1:1 and it appears in its created state in Gen 1:2 but doesn't actually become Earth - dry land - until the 3rd day? Why do you define Earth as matter instead of dry land?

Gen 1:1 says God created Heaven(s), but it doesn't appear until the 2nd Day. What was it doing while the Earth was under water and the light and dark were becoming day and night? Why do you define Heaven as air instead of the firmament? Or do you? You seem to be defining Heaven and Earth in terms I cant find in the creation story.

The first day when God said let there be light, was the first day of the universe, and the earth was not even a globe. It was matter that had no form, until gravity formed it into a globe.

Then how did it have an ocean covering it in Gen 1:2 before the 1st day? And where does God create the water?

This happened when God separated the light from the darkness. This darkness lasted until the morning of the 4th day when the earth was spinning and receiving the light from the sun for the first time. That was the moment the sun started to radiate light.

I dont understand, how can light and darkness become day and night on the 1st day followed by 2 more days and nights if the darkness lasted until the 4th day? The darkness is called Night, or evening. If you mean darkness ceased to exist on the 4th day as lights appeared in Earth's sky, the nights didn't end.

There is an explanation: the Earth refers to the dry land appearing on the 3rd day and the lights in Earth's sky appear next on the 4th day. Those lights were there before Earth appeared, but they were not in Earth's sky because the Earth as defined by God did not exist yet.

The reason that I said that the earth could still be the earth even without form, was from watching the Dr. Who episode where he went back to when the earth was being formed. Even if the earth did not have form and was a whirl of matter, it is still the earth.

Earth is the name God gave the dry land when the waters receded into seas in Gen 1:9-10... Thats why the Earth is not this planet. Your argument ignores the water in Gen 1:2, it wasn't created in Gen 1:1 but in Gen 1:2 its there covering the "Earth" before the 1st day of creation.

No, it does not become exposed land. Anyway, not any more than Antarctic continent does.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...on-bering-land-bridge-for-thousands-of-years/

I will take that argument when you find a lake or river taking at least 6 days to cross.

Several come to mind, the Great Lakes, Agassiz, Bonneville, Missoula, and Siberia had large glacial lakes that probably froze over. But the point is Beringia was a land bridge when ice age peoples were moving into the new world. The number of people who actually walked across it when it was covered by sea ice is minuscule.

Besides I brought the Bering thing up mainly because it very well fits the concept of light existing without source (dawn developing into dusk without a day an with little to no Sun seen close to the Arctic circle in winter).

But people knew that light was coming from the Sun

No, it definitely did not.

Anyway, the planet (or whatever it is under the Genesis concept) was apparently thriving with life long before the dry land appeared (or was created) to be populated later.

When did dry land and life appear?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

only the Flood could result in sea shells on top of mountains.

There's this thing called "plate tectonics" that results in mountain ranges being formed... and some of the rock layers in the higher elevations do indeed contain sea shells.

That doesn't mean the sea covered the mountain.

 

[Berzerker]

There's this thing called "plate tectonics" that results in mountain ranges being formed... and some of the rock layers in the higher elevations do indeed contain sea shells.

That doesn't mean the sea covered the mountain.

I know about plate tectonics... You're not following the conversation here is what Daw said:

The logic works like that there: "I see this shell here, but there's no sea down here, the sea is over there. But here is the shell, so the sea has been here once. Must be that it was bigger in the old days, and then retreated from here to where it is now. So land emerged from under the water."

He was arguing seashells could give rise to the myth of the land emerging from the primordial waters, to which I said:

The creation of land preceded life, only the Flood could result in sea shells on top of mountains.

See the smilie? I was pointing out to Daw seashells couldn't be evidence of the land emerging from the water because life hadn't started yet, therefore only the Great Flood could result in the seashells.

I wasn't saying the Flood left seashells on mountains, I was saying people with both myths - the emergence of land from water and the Flood - might attribute the shells to the Flood, not the creation of land prior to life.

 

[Daw]

When did dry land and life appear?

That's what I'm trying to figure out.

According to the version of planetry build-up I think to be the most logical, dry land predates liquid water. This is due to the temperature. There is a temperature range in which magmatic eruptions can solidify to make dry land, while water can still only be in the form of steam.

According to the genesis concept, it was vice versa: water first, land next.

As to the life appearance, liquid water was required for that.

So, IMO, dry land comes first, liquid water comes next, followed by organic molecules and then sea life.

 

[El_Machinae]

It's a lot of bother for a story that becomes obviously false by the third day.

 

[Berzerker]

That's what I'm trying to figure out.

According to the version of planetry build-up I think to be the most logical, dry land predates liquid water. This is due to the temperature. There is a temperature range in which magmatic eruptions can solidify to make dry land, while water can still only be in the form of steam.

Most magma erupts under water now and our oldest "rock" (zircons) formed in water going back 4.3-4 bya

According to the genesis concept, it was vice versa: water first, land next.

Genesis describes the appearance of dry land and life, it doesn't describe the formation of the proto-world. So if continents began forming ~4 bya via plate tectonics and was followed by life ~3.8 bya, then the water preceded both.

 

[onejayhawk]

It's a lot of bother for a story that becomes obviously false by the third day.

Was it? Or was it a true story, first told in prehistory and garbled in transmission? Schliemann discovered the ruins of Troy because he chose not to take a similar stance on the Illiad.

J

 

[Berzerker]

at least the first two days of creation are not obviously false

 

[Daw]

Genesis [...] doesn't describe the formation of the proto-world.

Then it is not genesis, is it?

Genesis describes the appearance of dry land and life

Let's start with dry land first.

Dry land means solid land, doesn't it? The concept of having solid land forming underwater requires submerged pre-solid (liquid?) land matter. Must be my lack of imagination, but I can't quite imagine a world like that. A world covered with bubbling lava beneath a dense steamy atmosphere seems a to be more sensible thing. But this picture can hardly be described a "submerged land", IMO.

 

[onejayhawk]

at least the first two days of creation are not obviously false

No, it is not obviously false. It could be a matter of determining exactly what was described.

J

 

[Manfred Belheim]

What I want to know is, how would the Earth colliding with the sun create the asteroid belt? And on what grounds to you assume a "bracelet" refers to the asteroid belt anyway? It's not a very good description of it.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Earth colliding with the Sun is not going to result in anything but the destruction of Earth.

 

[Birdjaguar]

If you take a look a the image in this link (its to a cfc thread) and study the progression from image 1 to 3 it is quite easy to see what will happen if the earth ever collides with Sol (our sun). Any notion of that being a "creative" act is quickly revealed as fiction.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=14066181&postcount=162

 

[timtofly]

Okay, I think I understand now... The Earth was created in Gen 1:1 and it appears in its created state in Gen 1:2 but doesn't actually become Earth - dry land - until the 3rd day? Why do you define Earth as matter instead of dry land?

Gen 1:1 says God created Heaven(s), but it doesn't appear until the 2nd Day. What was it doing while the Earth was under water and the light and dark were becoming day and night? Why do you define Heaven as air instead of the firmament? Or do you? You seem to be defining Heaven and Earth in terms I cant find in the creation story.

The word for earth in verse 1 is different than in verse 10. We call soil and dirt earth. I would define both heavens and earth in verse 1 as matter, because it was the state of the universe before there was light producing energy.

Genesis is the only creation story that claims God created the universe as opposed to being a part of an existing universe and manipulating it's evolution.

I am also defining light as all radiation, and since there was no form to the universe, the first night and day had no bearing on the earth, because it had no form until God separated the light from the darkness.

Then how did it have an ocean covering it in Gen 1:2 before the 1st day? And where does God create the water?

Water is still matter, and the earth had no form, thus there was no ocean. The verse just states that there was a concentration of water in the same area as the formless earth.

I dont understand, how can light and darkness become day and night on the 1st day followed by 2 more days and nights if the darkness lasted until the 4th day? The darkness is called Night, or evening. If you mean darkness ceased to exist on the 4th day as lights appeared in Earth's sky, the nights didn't end.

There is an explanation: the Earth refers to the dry land appearing on the 3rd day and the lights in Earth's sky appear next on the 4th day. Those lights were there before Earth appeared, but they were not in Earth's sky because the Earth as defined by God did not exist yet.

This was the start of the universe, and it would seem that God is defining a day before the earth would even experience one. The current cosmology states that there was 400 million years of darkness before the stars formed, and then roughly 8 billion years before the earth did. How could there be years before the earth even had a day? The first release of energy caused light to be experienced throughout the universe for 12 hours, and then there was darkness for the next 60 hours while the stars and planets were forming and then the sun began sending out light that could be seen on the morning of the 4th day.

Earth is the name God gave the dry land when the waters receded into seas in Gen 1:9-10... Thats why the Earth is not this planet. Your argument ignores the water in Gen 1:2, it wasn't created in Gen 1:1 but in Gen 1:2 its there covering the "Earth" before the 1st day of creation.

The creation of matter, and light all happened on the first day. You would literally have to say that evening was when God created matter. 12 hours later, God said let there be light. Then there was 12 hours of light, while radiation went throughout the whole universe. Then there was darkness in the evening which was the beginning of the second day. The creation of matter, including the formless earth with water in the mix of empty matter, and all the matter in the universe, and then the release of energy were all done on the first day. The day started out with darkness and ended when the darkness of the second day started. Evening and morning being defined as a day for each day of creation.

The second day or next 24 hour period was when the gravity formed the earth and water into a globe and God separated the water into a water covered globe and a firmament of air between the next layer of water. Whether the sun was sending out light or not during that day or the next does not really matter. I say it was dark, because God said the light did not show up until day 4. We are hearing the account from a earth perspective. While the sun was forming, it seems there was not enough radiation coming from it to be considered light, until the 4th day. If you want to say that God formed the earth first, and then on the 4th day finished all the rest of the universe, it would basically be the same thing. If the earth was without form, until after there was a universe in motion, why would not the rest of the universe be without form and all the galaxies were forming during the same time period? Galaxy formation should not be limited to just that time period either. The formation of the universe has gone on since the beginning since there has always been motion, and the interaction of matter with matter all the time.

When did dry land and life appear?

During the darkness of the 3rd day dry land appeared and then God planted all the plant life on the dry land. Still dark so all we are doing is considering it all in the same perspective that time was passing even if the earth was spinning or not, nor whether or not the sun light was reaching earth or not. The universe was more than likely in motion, because gravity was at work and even though it was dark there was still movement of mass in relation to all the other masses in the universe. We are still assuming that the universe had started to expand yet the whole universe was still in a period of darkness.

Fish and flying creatures came to life during the darkness and light of day 5.

All other life on earth was created during the darkness and light of day 6.