Genesis 1 is to be taken literaly - it is the only logical option

[Job 33:6]

And not only is the above the case, but those same differences in DNA also match the temporal order in which fossils appear in the fossil succession.

Just as fish share more differences in DNA with amphibians than they do reptiles, in the fossil record fish are found deepest, followed by amphibians and then reptiles.

This is the case to the extent that the locality of fossils can and has been predicted based on DNA relatedness.

A biologist can literally predict what temporal depth in the earth a fossil will be based on DNA of living day species. And without knowing animal genomes off the top of my head, as a geologist, j could also predict what animals have more similar dna based on the order in which their fossils appear in the earth.

For example, without even looking at the DNA of a flowering plant, I could tell everyone that a flowering plants DNA is more similar to a seed bearing plant than to a non seed bearing plant simply because of the order in which plants appear in the fossil record. Seed bearing plants share more differences in their DNA to non vascular plants than flowering plants do as well. And I know almost nothing about plants at all. But I know where their fossils are.

And I'm sure I am correct in the above predictions without even looking up information on plant dna.

 

[-57]

This thread is not about the fall. It is about evolution. So the fall is totally irrelevant to the topic.

The thread has been going on for a while..but...the title is "
Genesis 1 is to be taken literaly - it is the only logical option"

I was simply asking a question...Genesis tells us there was a literal fall in a literal garden.

AS to DNA....the DNA shows a common creator.

 

[GodLovesCats]

The fall did not happen in Genesis 1 or have anything to do with evolution.

 

[-57]

The fall did not happen in Genesis 1 or have anything to do with evolution.

You got the Genesis 1 part right...we have to wait for Gen 3.,,,,but, if evolution happened then the fall didn't happen.

 

[Copperhead]

And yet within the text is even more.

At Genesis 1:2, the Hebrew behind the English states that the earth became without form and void. Hayah Tohu va Tohu. To "become" without form and void, it had to have been created initially with form and not void. There is an indeterminate amount of time between "in the beginning" and "became without form and void".

The Lord does creates in perfection, not imperfection. Only the introduction of evil makes things change. Somewhere between "in the beginning" and "became" seems to imply the rebellion of Satan and those with him. It seems the creation of the earth as we know it was a response to the earth becoming void as a part of that rebellion.

While the angels did rejoice at the creation of the earth (Job 38), there is no scripture stating they rejoiced at the creation of the universe. So it seems they were created after the universe (heavens) was laid. And that seems to be the case. Angels like humans are restrained to confines of the physical dimension of time which is part of the created universe. They can see backwards in time just as we can, but they cannot see the end from the beginning as only the Father can. Therefore they are in the constraints of the known universe as we are.

So the creation as we know it from Genesis 1:3 onward can indeed be six 24 hour days, that doesn't mean that Genesis 1:1-2 were part of that same period. But even then, time being a physical dimension changes in relation to gravity, velocity, tearing and warping of space. What constitutes a "day" to the Lord may not be a time span of 24 hours. I add that just to show we should not try to view these things within the myopic scope of our own existence. I do believe it was 6 days as he scripture says.

Just to add a little levity so we don't all get bound up in knots over this.... Of all that days of creation from Genesis 1:3 onward, the Lord declares the creation of each day as being good... except one day. The second day He never declares it as good. The second day, we would generally agree that to be Monday. So for us, it sets the precedent so that it is OK for folks to feel Monday is the worse day of the week! So if someone is having a bad Monday at work, that's ok. The Lord never said Monday was good!

 

[-57]

And yet within the text is even more.

At Genesis 1:2, the Hebrew behind the English states that the earth became without form and void. Hayah Tohu va Tohu. To "become" without form and void, it had to have been created initially with form and not void. There is an indeterminate amount of time between "in the beginning" and "became without form and void".

I kinda doubt it. The bible doesn't say the earth became formless and void. The concept of an old earth is to support evolutionism. God didn't use evolution to create man.

The Lord does creates in perfection, not imperfection. Only the introduction of evil makes things change. Somewhere between "in the beginning" and "became" seems to imply the rebellion of Satan and those with him. It seems the creation of the earth as we know it was a response to the earth becoming void as a part of that rebellion.

The bible doesn't say there was a rebellion that made the earth into a formless and void planet.

While the angels did rejoice at the creation of the earth (Job 38), there is no scripture stating they rejoiced at the creation of the universe. So it seems they were created after the universe (heavens) was laid. And that seems to be the case. Angels like humans are restrained to confines of the physical dimension of time which is part of the created universe. They can see backwards in time just as we can, but they cannot see the end from the beginning as only the Father can. Therefore they are in the constraints of the known universe as we are.

The bible tells us Satan was in the Garden of Eden....and the description of him shows Satan being in an un-fallen state.

So the creation as we know it from Genesis 1:3 onward can indeed be six 24 hour days, that doesn't mean that Genesis 1:1-2 were part of that same period. But even then, time being a physical dimension changes in relation to gravity, velocity, tearing and warping of space. What constitutes a "day" to the Lord may not be a time span of 24 hours. I add that just to show we should not try to view these things within the myopic scope of our own existence. I do believe it was 6 days as he scripture says.

On day one there was no space to warp.

Just to add a little levity so we don't all get bound up in knots over this.... Of all that days of creation from Genesis 1:3 onward, the Lord declares the creation of each day as being good... except one day. The second day He never declares it as good. The second day, we would generally agree that to be Monday. So for us, it sets the precedent so that it is OK for folks to feel Monday is the worse day of the week! So if someone is having a bad Monday at work, that's ok. The Lord never said Monday was good!

BoomTown Rats.

 

[Copperhead]

I kinda doubt it. The bible doesn't say the earth became formless and void.

In the original Hebrew of Genesis 1:2 it does. Hayah Tohu va Bohu. literal... became (or had become) without form and void. Nothing to do with some evolutionary nonsense as you suggest.

 

[Copperhead]

The bible doesn't say there was a rebellion that made the earth into a formless and void planet.

No it doesn't.. literally. But we do know that the Satan and his cohorts had rebelled prior to man being in the garden. We also know from Genesis 1:2 that the earth had become without form and void, which implies that it had previously been with form and not void. Hence, while the text does not state why the earth became that way, the angelic rebellion is a reasoned assumption.

 

[Copperhead]

The bible tells us Satan was in the Garden of Eden....and the description of him shows Satan being in an un-fallen state.

Show us all chapter and verse that Satan in the garden at the time of Adam was not in a fallen state.

 

[Copperhead]

On day one there was no space to warp.

Your assertion rests on that Genesis 1:1 was day one. Actually, the text shows that Day One of the sequential six days of creation was not until after Genesis 1:3. Day one of creation that what we know now was after the earth had became without form and void in Genesis 1:2. Space had already been created in Genesis 1:1.

I see science in school was not your strong suit. Curved space, stretched space, warped space all are valid concepts in science. And even the scripture shows that the heavens (space) can be "stretched".

Psalms 104:1-2 (NKJV) Bless the Lord, O my soul!
O Lord my God, You are very great:
You are clothed with honor and majesty,
2 Who cover Yourself with light as with a garment,
Who stretch out the heavens like a curtain.

 

[-57]

In the original Hebrew of Genesis 1:2 it does. Hayah Tohu va Bohu. literal... became (or had become) without form and void. Nothing to do with some evolutionary nonsense as you suggest.

You're gonna need a pretty good reference.

 

[-57]

No it doesn't.. literally. But we do know that the Satan and his cohorts had rebelled prior to man being in the garden. We also know from Genesis 1:2 that the earth had become without form and void, which implies that it had previously been with form and not void. Hence, while the text does not state why the earth became that way, the angelic rebellion is a reasoned assumption.

You're making this up. "But we do know that the Satan and his cohorts had rebelled prior to man being in the garden. "

...care to prove it?

 

[-57]

Show us all chapter and verse that Satan in the garden at the time of Adam was not in a fallen state.

Eze 28:13 You were in Eden, the garden of God;

 

[-57]

Your assertion rests on that Genesis 1:1 was day one. Actually, the text shows that Day One of the sequential six days of creation was not until after Genesis 1:3. Day one of creation that what we know now was after the earth had became without form and void in Genesis 1:2. Space had already been created in Genesis 1:1.

I see science in school was not your strong suit. Curved space, stretched space, warped space all are valid concepts in science. And even the scripture shows that the heavens (space) can be "stretched".

Psalms 104:1-2 (NKJV) Bless the Lord, O my soul!
O Lord my God, You are very great:
You are clothed with honor and majesty,
2 Who cover Yourself with light as with a garment,
Who stretch out the heavens like a curtain.

Gen 1:6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters, to separate the waters from the waters.” 7 So God made the expanse and separated the waters beneath it from the waters above. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse “sky.”

then....14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish between the day and the night, and let them be signs to mark the seasons and days and years. 15 And let them serve as lights in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth.” And it was so.

Expanse is space....i'ts where the stars are. The stars were not made on day 1 or prior to day one.

 

[Copperhead]

Eze 28:13 You were in Eden, the garden of God;

might want to read the entire passage in context and still try to answer the question I posed. You did not prove that Satan was there in all glory before the fall at the same time of man.

Eden simply means pleasure or luxury. The earth was originally created perfect in beauty to provide pleasure and luxury for His created beings. But again, Genesis 1:2, the earth “became” without form and void.

It is akin to saying Lucifer is proper name for Satan. Lucifer is Latin for Morning Star. It is not a proper name but a position or title. Eden means pleasure, luxury, etc. in Ezk 28:13, the passage could legitimately be translated “in the luxurious garden of God”. Translations do not always convey the meaning.

 

[-57]

might want to read the entire passage in context and still try to answer the question I posed. You did not prove that Satan was there in all glory before the fall at the same time of man.

Ezk 28:13 tells about a supernatural being...a guardian cherub......biblical scholars have understood it to be Satan.

Eden simply means pleasure or luxury. The earth was originally created perfect in beauty to provide pleasure and luxury for His created beings. But again, Genesis 1:2, the earth “became” without form and void.

Here is Gen 1:2 as presented by bible hub...none of them use "became". As I have said earlier, there are some people who insert "became" into the verse in an attempt to create a time frame for evolution to occur.
There is nothing in the bible that suggest Satans fall destroyed a previous earth....That is, earth became formless and void.

The Garden of Eden was a place on earth. Gen 2:8 tells us that...8 And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, where He placed the man He had formed.

Once again, Eze 28:13 says this about Satan...You were in Eden, the garden of God;...and Satan (a guardian cherub) is described in a pre-fallen state.

It is akin to saying Lucifer is proper name for Satan. Lucifer is Latin for Morning Star. It is not a proper name but a position or title. Eden means pleasure, luxury, etc. in Ezk 28:13, the passage could legitimately be translated “in the luxurious garden of God”. Translations do not always convey the meaning.

All though I'm sure Eden was a luxurious garden...Eden doesn't mean "luxurious"
5731 Eden definition as per Strongs.
6027 oneg fits more into what you're trying to say.

 

[Copperhead]

Here is Gen 1:2 as presented by bible hub...none of them use "became". As I have said earlier, there are some people who insert "became" into the verse in an attempt to create a time frame for evolution to occur.
There is nothing in the bible that suggest Satans fall destroyed a previous earth....That is, earth became formless and void.

A simple look at the Hebrew behind the translation. Any Strong's, Young's, etc concordance.

the Hebrew is Hayah Tohu va Bohu. Literal translation is Became without form and void. Hayah means became, to become, break, fall, came to pass, etc. I didn't have to "insert" anything and am not "attempting" to create a time frame. Just taking the passage for what it literally says.

If you don't agree, I am to going to lose any sleep over it. It is fine with me. But your making accusations that I am attempting to obfuscate things like I have some sinister evolutionary agenda is way out of line. I fought tooth and nail with my Geology professors in college back in the day as it pertains to the false idea of evolution, especially in terms of the theory of uniformitarianism foisted upon us by Charles Lyell.

All though I'm sure Eden was a luxurious garden...Eden doesn't mean "luxurious"
5731 Eden definition as per Strongs.
6027 oneg fits more into what you're trying to say.

broaden your horizons and take a look at H5730, which is the exact same Hebrew word as H5731. Adds a bit of clarification.

 

[Copperhead]

There is nothing in the bible that suggest Satans fall destroyed a previous earth....That is, earth became formless and void.

Must have overlooked Jeremiah 4. Many theologians have seen this passage as a backward look at what happened at the fall as an analogy to what will happen. Since the entire earth has never been without form and void since Genesis 1:3, then it is a valid idea that what good 'ol Jere is writing about is a vision of the fall that occurred before man. Jere is talking about the entire earth in the same terminology as Genesis 1:2.

Jeremiah 4:23-26 I beheld the earth, and indeed it was without form, and void;
And the heavens, they had no light.
24 I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled,
And all the hills moved back and forth.
25 I beheld, and indeed there was no man,
And all the birds of the heavens had fled.
26 I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land was a wilderness,
And all its cities were broken down
At the presence of the Lord,
By His fierce anger.

And in response to that, the first thing the Lord said was "let there be light". No conflict at all.

 

[-57]

A simple look at the Hebrew behind the translation. Any Strong's, Young's, etc concordance.

the Hebrew is Hayah Tohu va Bohu. Literal translation is Became without form and void. Hayah means became, to become, break, fall, came to pass, etc. I didn't have to "insert" anything and am not "attempting" to create a time frame. Just taking the passage for what it literally says.

If you don't agree, I am to going to lose any sleep over it. It is fine with me. But your making accusations that I am attempting to obfuscate things like I have some sinister evolutionary agenda is way out of line. I fought tooth and nail with my Geology professors in college back in the day as it pertains to the false idea of evolution, especially in terms of the theory of uniformitarianism foisted upon us by Charles Lyell.



broaden your horizons and take a look at H5730, which is the exact same Hebrew word as H5731. Adds a bit of clarification.

You're argument still falls short. There is no biblical reason to translate "was" what is describing the appearance of the earth prior to God finishing the creation as "became" indicating the earth was destroyed. There is no biblical record of Satan falling and destroying the earth to the point it became formless and void.

I'm not accusing you of presenting some sinister evolutionary agenda. I had said there are some "gap" theorist who use became as a means of creating a time period allowing for an old earth and evolution.

 

[-57]

Must have overlooked Jeremiah 4. Many theologians have seen this passage as a backward look at what happened at the fall as an analogy to what will happen. Since the entire earth has never been without form and void since Genesis 1:3, then it is a valid idea that what good 'ol Jere is writing about is a vision of the fall that occurred before man. Jere is talking about the entire earth in the same terminology as Genesis 1:2.

Jeremiah 4:23-26 I beheld the earth, and indeed it was without form, and void;
And the heavens, they had no light.
24 I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled,
And all the hills moved back and forth.
25 I beheld, and indeed there was no man,
And all the birds of the heavens had fled.
26 I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land was a wilderness,
And all its cities were broken down
At the presence of the Lord,
By His fierce anger.

And in response to that, the first thing the Lord said was "let there be light". No conflict at all.

The context here is the destruction of Judah. The comparism is to what Judah would become like, that is likend to the state of the earth prior to God finishing creation.