Creation from a different angle?

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

During one of the most thrilling threads I have participated in here, I had one of those moments when one has a look at something from a different angle. Perhaps it was Big Hero 6, which helped.

What?

I was thinking about Genesis chapters 1 verse one and two. As you know it's broken into three sentences:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Well, I was focussing on the second one and thought, I wondered if this could be personal -- if it was more of a revelation of something, rather than historical -- sort of Theosophical. A description of our first state, and looked at the third sentence. Yeah!

Looking at the first, I thought God did create this place often referred to as a veil of tears. I know it is a little out there, but I am trying angles.

What is your angle on these three sentences?

Here is another angle:

Oh yeah!

I found it.

What?

I have been searching for the Quaker Bible Index for Genesis, for quite some time and wanted to present it as another angle -- So here it is:

(Gen 1:1)
GF4: 252 (1660): [Gen 1:1, see under Gen 1:9-12]

(Gen 1:9-12)
GF4: 252 (1660): There is a power above all powers, and this power is making itself manifest: and this is God, whose power this is, who is an overruler, the creator, the former, and maker of all things in heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]; and gathered together the waters, and made the sea, and made the earth, and caused it to bud, and bring forth [Gen 1:9-12]; who hath all times and seasons in his hand [Psa 31:15], and placed man in the garden [Gen 2:8].

(Gen 1:2)
GF8: 17 (1669): For there is a form of godliness [2 Tim 3:5], and there is a form of sound words [2 Tim 1:13]; many have a form. All creatures have a form, the earth hath a form, and all things were brought into a form by the power of God; for the earth was once without form, and was void [Gen 1:2], and empty and confused. So they that be gone out of the covenant of God and life, and out of the power of God, are gone into a confused condition without form, a state which is out of the bond of civil men and women.
RBA 33, RBAF 25 (1678, II:7): by the Spirit God has always revealed himself to his children... The first step of all is ascribed hereunto by Moses (Gen 1:2), "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

To read more, and explore links: http://esr.earlham.edu/qbi/0pent/gen1-3.htm

 

[Davian]

Like the movie, a work of fiction.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

 

[HitchSlap]

I think "creationism" from any angle is fractally wrong.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I think "creationism" from any angle is fractally wrong.

I watched a lecture by John Walton and he had a very different angle.

Do you know his work?

I found this tonight: Genesis Through Ancient Eyes | The BioLogos Forum

 

[SkyWriting]

I was thinking about Genesis chapters 1 verse one and two. As you know it's broken into three sentences:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Well, I was focussing on the second one and thought, I wondered if this could be personal -- if it was more of a revelation of something, rather than historical -- sort of Theosophical.

Yes. At this point in the story, God's mind is all that exists.

So yes, you must be correct, according to the story.

 

[HitchSlap]

I watched a lecture by John Walton and he had a very different angle.

Do you know his work?

I found this tonight: Genesis Through Ancient Eyes | The BioLogos Forum

Never heard of him. But I'm guessing he's trying to shoehorn scientific facts into the mythological G1/2 accounts?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Never heard of him. But I'm guessing he's trying to shoehorn scientific facts into the mythological G1/2 accounts?

Actually not. He had this interesting thing to say about the temple.
I have no video on my android, or computer to view cool stuff.
So it's up to you.

He lectured at Cambridge. Heard him first there: Multimedia 2012 and 2014

The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Yes. At this point in the story, God's mind is all that exists.

So yes, you must be correct, according to the story.

Yeah, I like to think so.
The way the NT, uses phrases from these first two, three verses -- there is as CS Lewis* "Jack" thought, more to it than a bland one dimensional account.

~~~
* C. S. Lewis and Creation Science

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Never heard of him. But I'm guessing he's trying to shoehorn scientific facts into the mythological G1/2 accounts?

John Walton says, "We should not expect the Bible to answer the questions that arise from our own time and culture. Genesis was written to Israelites and addressed human origins in light of the questions they would have had. We should not try to make modern science out of the information that we are given, but should try to understand the affirmations that the text is making in its own context." (quoted from The Creation of Humankind in the Ancient Near East)*

~~~
* John Walton - Theology & Creation in Genesis

 

[HitchSlap]

John Walton says, "We should not expect the Bible to answer the questions that arise from our own time and culture. Genesis was written to Israelites and addressed human origins in light of the questions they would have had. We should not try to make modern science out of the information that we are given, but should try to understand the affirmations that the text is making in its own context." (quoted from The Creation of Humankind in the Ancient Near East)*

~~~
* John Walton - Theology & Creation in Genesis

Ok. Then we should keep science - science, and myth - myth.

 

[cerad]

Yep. This should be moved to a theology forum so everyone can oh and ahh at the sophisticated concepts. Creationism, no matter from what angle you view it from, is just plain wrong.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Ok. Then we should keep science - science, and myth - myth.

How can we not?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Yep. This should be moved to a theology forum so everyone can oh and ahh at the sophisticated concepts. Creationism, no matter from what angle you view it from, is just plain wrong.

Have you read / watched anything by John Walton, with regard to Genesis 1?

 

[cerad]

Have you read / watched anything by John Walton, with regard to Genesis 1?

I once read an anthology of classic fairy tales. Does that count?

 

[Doveaman]

I was thinking about Genesis chapters 1 verse one and two. As you know it's broken into three sentences:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Well, I was focussing on the second one and thought, I wondered if this could be personal -- if it was more of a revelation of something, rather than historical

How about a revelation of what was historical.

The first sentence describes who did the creating.
The second sentence describes the state of the planet before the creating began.
The third sentence describes the power source behind the creating.

It's not complicated.

 

[Nithavela]

I was thinking about Genesis chapters 1 verse one and two. As you know it's broken into three sentences:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Well, I was focussing on the second one and thought, I wondered if this could be personal -- if it was more of a revelation of something, rather than historical -- sort of Theosophical. A description of our first state, and looked at the third sentence. Yeah!

Looking at the first, I thought God did create this place often referred to as a veil of tears. I know it is a little out there, but I am trying angles.

What is your angle on these three sentences?

The hebrew word used for water in this part of the bible is the one concerning the chaotic, abyssal deep that surrounds the world and lies at its bottom. It is described as chaotic, without form and function.

This view of chaos as the beginning of everything is found in many other places of ancient mythology, like the greek pantheon.

Now, personally I believe that what the bible speaks about is not a what, but a whom: Discordia, of course.

Could also be Venus with a fake mustache, though.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I once read an anthology of classic fairy tales. Does that count?

Well, it may help in developing ones imagination -- which was something Einstein valued (and he had this huge IQ)

However, John Walton who '....is professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College. He formerly was a professor at Moody Bible Institute for 20 years. His primary focus is in areas of comparison between the Old Testament and the Ancient Near East, particularly Genesis. He espouses a view of creation that resonates with ancient Near Eastern mindsets, much like a temple dedication ceremony, and not a strictly material account of cosmological origins....'* is certainly on the right track even according to the most scholarly skeptics I have known, in my years as Bible student.

~~~
* John H. Walton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

How about a revelation of what was historical.

The first sentence describes who did the creating.
The second sentence describes the state of the planet before the creating began.
The third sentence describes the power source behind the creating.

It's not complicated.

Have you ever been to an art gallery, read a poem or studied any of the books written by John Walton? (check out his credentials too) :

Books

The Lost World of Adam and Eve: Genesis 2-3 and the Human Origins Debate (IVP, 2015)

The Lost World of Scripture: Ancient Literary Culture and Biblical Authority (with: D. Brent Sandy, IVP, 2013)

Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology (Eisenbrauns, 2011)

The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate (IVP, 2009)

Jonah (Expositor's Bible Commentary, Zondervan: 2008)

Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament (Baker: 2006) (my note: considering Clinton R. Dawkins' book "God Delusion" came out this year, I am pretty sure it's a spicy meatball!)

Essential Bible Companion (Zondervan: 2006)

Old Testament Today (Zondervan: 2004)

Genesis (NIV Application Commentary, Zondervan: 2001)

Ancient Israelite Literature in its Cultural Context, A Survey of Parallels Between Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Zondervan: 1989)

I think his most recent work has just shot to the top of my list of serious reads, for this year. Right on the proverbial button, for discussions, arguments and fembots (my android chose that word for debates. Kinky!

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

The hebrew word used for water in this part of the bible is the one concerning the chaotic, abyssal deep that surrounds the world and lies at its bottom. It is described as chaotic, without form and function.

This view of chaos as the beginning of everything is found in many other places of ancient mythology, like the greek pantheon.

Now, personally I believe that what the bible speaks about is not a what, but a whom: Discordia, of course.

Could also be Venus with a fake mustache, though.

Well, I am glad to read fiery imaginative stuff.
Have you read, watched or studied any of John Walton's books. (read above posts for credentials and pertinent book lists)