7-Day Creation- Figurative or Literal?

[Inan3]

Did God create the world in 7 literal days, is Genesis figurative language? Is it how we each interpret Genesis? Is Genesis a narrative to the Israelites by Moses, so they would understand God?

It's an awesome controversial topic!
Thoughts and Opinions! =)

No God did not create the "world" in 7 literal days. No Genesis is not "figurative language." There is only ONE way to interpret Genesis but it will have much revelation and one would have to be spiritual to interpret it. Genesis is NOT a narrative to the Israelites by Moses so they would understand God. Although one could get understanding of God in reading and hearing Genesis and there are stories in Genesis of peoples lives.

All of God's word is controversial to the unbeliever. The scriptures CANNOT be discerned by the natural man. You must be born of the spirit to comprehend spiritual things. The scriptures are spiritual and must be interpreted spiritually. And yet, it is very simple. One just needs to read it and they could understand it but only with the attitude and honest desire to understand it. The scriptures clearly tell us that the truth is hidden from those who do not believe. Not because God keeps it from them but rather that their own unbelief keeps them in the dark and blinded to the truth.

 

[BobRyan]

According to God's Word - the Bible- it was done in 7 real days - the same kind of real day with one "evening and morning" ending with the 7th day - Gen 2:1-3 blessed, sanctified and set apart. "Made for mankind" Mark 2:27

The same kind of real day as "Six days you shall labor and do all your work...for in six DAYs the Lord MADE" Ex 20:8-11. -- legal code.


[FONT=&quot]Exod 20[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
8 ""[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Remember [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 "" [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Six days you[/FONT][FONT=&quot] shall labor and do all your work,
10 but [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the seventh day[/FONT][FONT=&quot] is a Sabbath of the LORD your God; [/FONT][FONT=&quot]in it[/FONT][FONT=&quot] you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]11 "" [/FONT][FONT=&quot]For in six days[/FONT][FONT=&quot] the LORD [/FONT][FONT=&quot]made[/FONT][FONT=&quot] the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]rested on the seventh day[/FONT][FONT=&quot]; therefore the LORD [/FONT][FONT=&quot]blessed the Sabbath day[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and made it holy.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Gen 2 (NASB)

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.
2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He [/FONT][FONT=&quot]rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
3 Then [/FONT][FONT=&quot]God blessed the seventh day and sanctified[/FONT][FONT=&quot] it, [/FONT][FONT=&quot]because [/FONT][FONT=&quot]in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.[/FONT]

So that "legal code" given at Sinai - was fully understood by the shepherds listening to the Law -- since they then had to go out and "keep the Sabbath" memorial of Creation week.

Endless debating among themselves about "what does 7 really mean here" was not part of the equation - in real life.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[SkyWriting]

Remember, the sun, moon and stars were created on day four. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; meaning that it was in a gaseous state; and darkness was on the face of the deep. There was no light, only darkness. And God said "Let there be light," and then there was a source of light. He divided the light from the darkness, meaning that the earth solidified and was able to shade the side facing away from the light. The evening and the morning were the first day, which means the planet was in rotation. It doesn't specify the rate of speed, but given that the planet is slowing it was probably slightly less than a 24 hour day. Regardless, however long the days were the nights were the same length of time. There is no reason to believe that a day was much other than it is now; one rotation of the planet. On day four from the single source of light, all of the universe formed. This is consistent with "Big Bang" theory, though that's more likely because cosmologists have not better explanation. The sun, being the closest source of light, now determined day and night. However, the planet was still in rotation so regardless of the source and location of light a day would still be a day.

Yes, I remember.
But my audience is not so well read or trusting in the same texts as me so i didn't get into the scriptural details.

 

[SkyWriting]

I fail to see the relevance to your post #20 because no matter the definition of day you use the light (/sun) is used in the definition of both. Also that it seems like an obvious statement without connection, could you explain what you meant?

Incorrect. Morning and evening are used to define "day". This normal language tells of a 24 hour day for each day of Creation.
That's why our work week is not 7 eons long. You can thank God for that.

 

[SkyWriting]

There is only ONE way to interpret Genesis but it will have much revelation and one would have to be spiritual to interpret it.

I'm unable to cite any sources to back you up on this.
Sorry.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I think one can make the original language tell a different creation story from what is generally believed, one that is more satisfying to those of us who believe the earth to be ancient.

As an OEC and believer of the GAP theory I can reinterpret the story, using valid Hebrew synonyms, to do this. For example the word 'made' can be translated as 'put in order'. This fits nicely with a legitimate translation of Gen 1:2 reading, "and the earth became a 'chaotic wasteland'. So much of the Genesis creation story can be viewed as a re-creation, or restoration, of the earth's biology and atmosphere which was destroyed by cataclysmic events.

The great age of the earth and the evidence of these events is obvious, and there is ample room in the Hebrew language to accomodate these facts. The early bible scholars translated the texts to satisfy their already closely held beliefs, thus interpretation by translation.

 

[Split Rock]

Six



No.



Is what how we each interpret Genesis?



Genesis is written to us, that me might have hope.

Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.



Nice to meet you ... welcome to CF!

Welcome back, buddy!

 

[Split Rock]

Creationists cannot effectively argue their position..

I agree.

Creationists know what their position is but Darwinism has replaced 'God' with 'natural law', evolution as a scientific definition is blended with a metaphysical one and will never admit it. .

We don't admit to things which aren't so.

The devil does not offer you a bottle of poison, he poisons a steak and invites you to dinner:.

Is that why he invented creationism, and called it Chrisitanity?

This is not a lament of despair, I'm proud of Creationists for not wasting time arguing against this a priori assumption evolutionists will never admit..

All they do is argue here.. mostly against reality.

These people know full well that there is a God, who created the heavens and the earth and they suppressed that truth in unrighteousness:
.

You really need to stop making assumptions about what others "know full well." Even if it makes you feel good about yourself.. see: "The devil does not offer you a bottle of poison, he poisons a steak and invites you to dinner." (above)

 

[mark kennedy]

I think one can make the original language tell a different creation story from what is generally believed, one that is more satisfying to those of us who believe the earth to be ancient.

As an OEC and believer of the GAP theory I can reinterpret the story, using valid Hebrew synonyms, to do this. For example the word 'made' can be translated as 'put in order'. This fits nicely with a legitimate translation of Gen 1:2 reading, "and the earth became a 'chaotic wasteland'. So much of the Genesis creation story can be viewed as a re-creation, or restoration, of the earth's biology and atmosphere which was destroyed by cataclysmic events.

The great age of the earth and the evidence of these events is obvious, and there is ample room in the Hebrew language to accomodate these facts. The early bible scholars translated the texts to satisfy their already closely held beliefs, thus interpretation by translation.

I have a couple of synonyms for you, how about the 'creation' and the 'incarnation'? Here's how it works:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. (Nicene Creed)​

That's creation.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;​

That's the incarnation:

By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth];​

That's Christ, the Creator.

I didn't really understand why Christian Apologetics always emphasized the Incarnation before any of the evidence or even presuppositions were discussed. It's because the Incarnation like the creation are transcendent, just as everything in the Old Testament follows creation, everything in the New Testament follow the Incarnation.

So how do you accommodate those facts? How do you resort to a naturalistic explanation for creation when it sandwiches the Incarnation in the opening lines of the Nicene Creed? John's Gospel opens the same way, so how do you maintain your Christian confession and reject creation? All Christians are Creationists. I had a much harder time with the Incarnation then I did the creation, but as it turns out they are the same thing.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[CabVet]

So how do you accommodate those facts?

Those are not facts, they are beliefs. BIG difference.

 

[Elendur]

Incorrect. Morning and evening are used to define "day". This normal language tells of a 24 hour day for each day of Creation.
That's why our work week is not 7 eons long. You can thank God for that.

And how would you define morning and evening?

 

[loktai]

All of God's word is controversial to the unbeliever. The scriptures CANNOT be discerned by the natural man.

But it was written by the natural man... say what?!

 

[driewerf]

Did God create the world in 7 literal days,

No.
I'm an atheist, I don't think there is any god: not the god of the christians, not the muslim god or the jewish god. Not the many gods of the hindus, the neopagans etc.
So, no I don't think a god created the earth.

is Genesis figurative language? Is it how we each interpret Genesis? Is Genesis a narrative to the Israelites by Moses, so they would understand God?

Genesis is a myth. It is a "story" told by the ancient Hebrews in order to make sense of the world around them. There are many (creation)myths around the world (Homer's illad is another famous example).

On a side note, I hate it when fellow atheists call the bible (or genesis) a fairytale book. It is not. It is a myth. Like all myths it contains supernatural elements, parts of magic etc. But that doesn't make it a fairytale. Myths try much more to explain phenomena that is seen and not understood, in terms of this supernatural. Just like a saga isn't a fairytale.
I consider it unnecessary insulting to christians, and it simply isn't correct.

 

[AV1611VET]

Welcome back, buddy!

Thank you, my friend!

 

[RickG]

Remember, the sun, moon and stars were created on day four. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; meaning that it was in a gaseous state; and darkness was on the face of the deep. There was no light, only darkness. And God said "Let there be light," and then there was a source of light. He divided the light from the darkness, meaning that the earth solidified and was able to shade the side facing away from the light. The evening and the morning were the first day, which means the planet was in rotation. It doesn't specify the rate of speed, but given that the planet is slowing it was probably slightly less than a 24 hour day. Regardless, however long the days were the nights were the same length of time. There is no reason to believe that a day was much other than it is now; one rotation of the planet.


On day four from the single source of light, all of the universe formed. This is consistent with "Big Bang" theory, though that's more likely because cosmologists have not better explanation. The sun, being the closest source of light, now determined day and night. However, the planet was still in rotation so regardless of the source and location of light a day would still be a day.

Then explain how there are plants and fruits before the Sun and why the big bang occurred 11 billion years before the earth was formed. Trying to explain genesis with known science does not work. It is contradictory. Perhaps it is better to accept that the creation story is a story about the creation that people of the time accepted through their non-science knowledge.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

How do you resort to a naturalistic explanation for creation.........?

I believe in creation, but an ancient one, that was damaged many times before GenOne. I believe Genesis is a poetic account of the beginning of the 'restitution of all things', things both material and spiritual that were damaged in the angelic rebellion.

 

[BobRyan]

According to God's Word - the Bible- it was done in 7 real days - the same kind of real day with one "evening and morning" ending with the 7th day - Gen 2:1-3 blessed, sanctified and set apart. "Made for mankind" Mark 2:27

The same kind of real day as "Six days you shall labor and do all your work...for in six DAYs the Lord MADE" Ex 20:8-11. -- legal code.


[FONT=&quot]Exod 20[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
8 ""[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Remember [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 "" [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Six days you[/FONT][FONT=&quot] shall labor and do all your work,
10 but [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the seventh day[/FONT][FONT=&quot] is a Sabbath of the LORD your God; [/FONT][FONT=&quot]in it[/FONT][FONT=&quot] you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]11 "" [/FONT][FONT=&quot]For in six days[/FONT][FONT=&quot] the LORD [/FONT][FONT=&quot]made[/FONT][FONT=&quot] the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]rested on the seventh day[/FONT][FONT=&quot]; therefore the LORD [/FONT][FONT=&quot]blessed the Sabbath day[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and made it holy.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Gen 2 (NASB)

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.
2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He [/FONT][FONT=&quot]rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
3 Then [/FONT][FONT=&quot]God blessed the seventh day and sanctified[/FONT][FONT=&quot] it, [/FONT][FONT=&quot]because [/FONT][FONT=&quot]in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.[/FONT]

So that "legal code" given at Sinai - was fully understood by the shepherds listening to the Law -- since they then had to go out and "keep the Sabbath" memorial of Creation week.

Endless debating among themselves about "what does 7 really mean here" was not part of the equation - in real life.

In short - when the question is asked about what the Bible states -- the answer is clear.

Some choose to believe the Bible - others to bend the Bible to fit the usages of blind faith evolutionism.

I choose to believe it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[RickG]

Some choose to believe the Bible - others to bend the Bible to fit the usages of blind faith evolutionism.

Blind faith evolutionism? Come on Bob, you know very well that the theory of evolution has nothing to do with blind faith. There are literally millions of legitimate scientific research papers published describing evolution across numerous fields of science. In fact, there is not a single branch of any "physical" science that does not include evolution in its literature. Ia just performed quick search using the word "evolution" in a scientific search engine which yielded over 3.64 million hits.

There is a huge difference between physical evidence and blind faith. I do not ask you to believe in evolution, however, I do ask you to stop belittling a very robust science. If you want to discuss evolution then do so, but I caution continuation of belittlement. Thank you.

... in Christ, RickG.

 

[Dieselman]

Then explain how there are plants and fruits before the Sun

God spoke them into existence in their adult stage. This means there were trees with blooms and probably growth rings, fruit containing seeds, and an ecosystem scientists would proclaim took billions of years to happen. However, there were no scientists and no sun; but there WAS a source of light apart from the earth. We don't know how far away it was, but we DO know that when God said "Let there be light" it provided for the evenings and the mornings.

and why the big bang occurred 11 billion years before the earth was formed.

Excuse me? I believe we are reading different books. Nowhere in the Bible does it state anything like that. Scientists who were not there see the universe in its mature state and presume it took billions of years. Jesus who WAS there states that the Scriptures are accurate as written. You can choose who you want to believe, but until scientists walk on water cast out demons, calm storms and return from the dead, I think I'll believe the word of God.

Trying to explain genesis with known science does not work.

It works for those of us who understand that you can't use natural law to explain the supernatural. If God can create the universe, He doesn't have to read a science book to know how to do it. Science is the study of the physical world around us. In cannot study nor account for the supernatural. They are entirely different. God created Adam and Eve as adults; fully grown and able to speak. If you met Adam on his first day of existence, how old would he be? Could an adult man standing in front of you possibly be less than 12 hours old?

It is contradictory.

Exactly!

Perhaps it is better to accept that the creation story is a story about the creation that people of the time accepted through their non-science knowledge.

No, I think it's better to have faith in God and know that His word is truth. Science is good at interpreting the world as it is. It has no way of accounting for a God who could create an entire universe just by telling it to exist.

 

[BobRyan]

Blind faith evolutionism? Come on Bob, you know very well that the theory of evolution has nothing to do with blind faith.

Collin Patterson - Senior Paleontologist - British Museum of Natural History -- evolutionist, atheist, devotee offers this frank analysis of the problem in blind-faith evolutionism.

===============================

Collin Patterson (atheist and diehard evolutionist to the day he died in 1998) - Paleontologist British Museum of Natural history speaking at the American Museum of Natural History in 1981 - said:

Patterson - quotes Gillespie's arguing that Christians
"'...holding creationist ideas could plead ignorance of the means and affirm only the fact,'"

Patterson countered, "That seems to summarize the feeling I get in talking to evolutionists today. They plead ignorance of the means of transformation, but affirm only the fact (saying):'Yes it has...we know it has taken place.'"

"...Now I think that many people in this room would acknowledge that during the last few years, if you had thought about it at all, you've experienced a shift from evolution as knowledge to evolution as faith. I know that's true of me, and I think it's true of a good many of you in here...

"...,Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge , apparent knowledge which is actually harmful to systematics..."

--------------------------


Colin Patterson (Senior paleontologist at the British Natural History Museum and author of the Museum’s general text on evolution) in a talk given at the American Museum of Natural History 1981

--------------------- Patterson said -

“Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing…that is true?

I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural history and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology seminar in the University of Chicago, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said “I know one thing – it ought not to be taught in high school”

"...I'm speaking on two subjects, evolutionism and creationism, and I believe it's true to say that I know nothing whatever about either...One of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, well, let's call it non-evolutionary , was last year I had a sudden realization.

"For over twenty years I had thought that I was working on evolution in some way. One morning I woke up, and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff fortwenty years, and there was not one thing I knew about it. "That was quite a shock that one could be misled for so long...

It does seem that the level of knowledge about evolution is remarkably shallow. We know it ought not to be taught in high school, and perhaps that's all we know about it...

about eighteen months ago...I woke up and I realized that all my life I had been duped into taking evolutionism as revealed truth in some way."

========================

When it comes to adopting blind-faith evolutionism ... caveat emptor!

Because as it turns out - gas, dust and rocks do not naturally "assemble themselves into prokaryotes" and as it turns out "Prokaryotes do not gradually become eukaryotes" and as it turns out - the amoeba will not turn into a horse not even with billions of years of time given to do it.

Oh but wait! This thread is about - what the bible says - not blind faith evolutionism.

Never mind.

in Christ,

Bob