Young earth vs Old earth?

[CoreyD]

Moving water is creation. Because that is in fact what God does during the 6 days of creation.

Yes, but that is not creating the water.
God created seas, which is the body of water moved by the land to form seas.

Can you see the seas?
Can you see the oceans?
What are the differences?

Oceans and seas are both large bodies of saltwater, but they differ primarily in size, depth, and geographical location. Oceans are vast, deep, and continuous expanses of water that cover approximately 71% of Earth's surface, forming one interconnected global ocean.
Seas, in contrast, are generally smaller, shallower, and are typically partially enclosed by land, often located at the margins of oceans where they meet continents or islands.
While seas are part of the larger ocean system, they are distinguished by their proximity to land and often have unique ecological and geographical characteristics.

God created seas from the existing body of water described as the watery deep.
The seas did not exist until the earth move, but the body of water existed before.
God is not now creating the body of water again. That would be ridiculous to say.
The seas are a new creation. They have now come into existence with the movement of the earth.

Do you yet understand J?

Genesis 1:6-10 ESV
[6] And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” [7] And God made the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so. [8] And God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

This is God creating. No one should argue that God isn't actually creating anything here. He is creating the heavens and the earth. That's what the 6 days of Genesis are about.

No J.
The heaven that God here creates, is the expanse, where the birds fly, etc. See this post.
It's not the heavens. That's why from Genesis 1:14-18, we read "heaven / expanse of the heavens"
Did you not read that... expanse of the heavens?
Then read it again, as it is described. The expanse is heaven, right? Therefore the expanse of the heavens is the heaven of the heavens, is it not?
Genesis 1:1 reads "God created the heavens..." Not the heaven.
The heavens in verse 1 is not the expanse.
The expanse lies within the heavens... if you consider realistically, that the earth actually is in the heavens. It's a body within space.

However, if you are a flat earther, you might well argue that there is no such thing as space, but that is another argument from this topic.

"Was the earth in existence when God's spirit was moving on the waters?"

Of course it was.
That's why there was a watery deep, and why God was able to separate the land from the water, causing mountains and hills, and land masses to form.
The land did not POOF out of thin air.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

It doesn't say that the earth didn't exist yet. It says that the earth was formless or in a chaotic state, while a wind from God swept over the waters. It was already there.

Thank you.
Yes, the earth already existed, on day one.

 

[CoreyD]

I would say that these verses are about moving things, separating, organizing, structuring. As opposed to material objects simply coming into existence. Light, like darkness, particularly in old testament times, were not viewed as physical objects as we think of them today in terms of photons.

We don't create the wool we buy and then knit into something, right J?

However, we know the wool we buy wasn't always there.
We know the wool we buy comes from the fleece of sheep and other animals such as goats, rabbits, alpacas, llamas, camels, and even some species of cows.
The manufacturers of the wool created it from existing material.

Would we say the sheep, goats, rabbits, alpacas, llamas, camels, and cows always existed?
No. We wouldn't say that. We know they had a beginning. They came into existence.

Though things can be created from things already in existence, it doesn't mean the thing in existence was not created, or did not come into existence, does it.
Light emitters do come into existence, don't they. We see that in reality.
There is always a source of light.

The Bible says of God, at Psalm 90:2... Before the mountains were born or You brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting You are God.
So, God is everlasting. He has always existed. He is the beginning and the end. Revelation 21:6
Hence God has no beginning, but always is.

Psalm 36:9 says, For with thee is the fountain of life: In thy light shall we see light.
We know David is referring to spiritual light - that is, God's direction, just as he says in Psalm 119:105, because we can see physical light all around us, including the ones God so lovingly made available to us. Genesis 1:14-18

Darkness therefore, is consumed by both God, and the physical lights we see.
That darkness always existed, is a reasonable conclusion, and because we know God always existed, light always existed.
However, sunlight and moonlight did not always exist. They were created, or came into existence.
Do we agree on this?

Genesis 1:3-4, 6-7, 9-10 ESV
[3] And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. [4] And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.

Light on the earth from the sun is indeed separated from the darkness on the earth, isn't it.

[6] And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” [7] And God made the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so.

How refreshing it would be to have water above the expanse - our atmosphere, to cool things down considerably.
Using vertically high resolved satellite observations from radio occultation, we focus on the temperature impact in the stratosphere from the [Hunga volcano] eruption in January 2022 until December 2023. Separating the signals of the Hunga eruption from the broader stratospheric variability reveals a strong persistent radiative cooling of up to –4 K in the tropical and subtropical middle stratosphere from early after the eruption until mid-2023, clearly corresponding to the water vapor distribution. Our results provide new insights from observations into both the localized temperature changes and the persistent stratospheric cooling caused by the Hunga eruption and document this exceptional climatic effect not seen for previous volcanic eruptions.

[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

I imagine there were many seas when God started moving the land.

I would say that these verse are more about organizing, separating, ordering things. Rather than ex nihilo creating things. Gathering waters, separating them, separating light from dark.

My question here is, would you say the waters were created by God, or the water had no beginning?
Would you deny that God created the waters that covered the earth?

And we see this elsewhere as well:
Psalm 104:2, 5 ESV
[2] covering yourself with light as with a garment, stretching out the heavens like a tent.
[5] He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.

Taking the heavens that are already there and stretching them out.

My question here would be, would you deny that God created the heavens and then stretched them out?
Would you object to that?
Isaiah 44:24
This is what the LORD says, He who is your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb: “I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself And spreading out the earth alone,

Or here is an interesting one:
Wisdom of Solomon 11:17
For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears or bold lions.

Sounds like something someone plagiarized and adjusted.
I would not use text like these that are known to be later additions to the existing Canon
Why would you use "deuterocanonical" writings, when they have "myriads of inconsistencies"?

When we look at old testament texts closely, we see this theme come out again and again. The material, the formless earth. It was already there.

Remember, Wisdom of Solomon is not an "Old Testament" writing.
It does not belong to the protocanonical writings, and are questionable.
Regardless, though formless does not mean nonexistent, as you acknowledged. Nor does it mean 'was not created'.
Like you said, the pizza needs work even after you slap and roll the dough into shape.
It now need toppings and baking, but it's still your creation, isn't it.

Wisdom of Solomon was in the 1611 King James Version of the Bible as apocrypha or deuterocononical, but either way, it gives us a window or a reference into the ancient world and how things were viewed back then.

I'm interested to know... How were things viewed, J.

 

[Job 33:6]

Yes, but that is not creating the water.
God created seas, which is the body of water moved by the land to form seas.

Can you see the seas?
Can you see the oceans?
What are the differences?

Oceans and seas are both large bodies of saltwater, but they differ primarily in size, depth, and geographical location. Oceans are vast, deep, and continuous expanses of water that cover approximately 71% of Earth's surface, forming one interconnected global ocean.
Seas, in contrast, are generally smaller, shallower, and are typically partially enclosed by land, often located at the margins of oceans where they meet continents or islands.
While seas are part of the larger ocean system, they are distinguished by their proximity to land and often have unique ecological and geographical characteristics.

God created seas from the existing body of water described as the watery deep.
The seas did not exist until the earth move, but the body of water existed before.
God is not now creating the body of water again. That would be ridiculous to say.
The seas are a new creation. They have now come into existence with the movement of the earth.

Do you yet understand J?


No J.
The heaven that God here creates, is the expanse, where the birds fly, etc. See this post.
It's not the heavens. That's why from Genesis 1:14-18, we read "heaven / expanse of the heavens"
Did you not read that... expanse of the heavens?
Then read it again, as it is described. The expanse is heaven, right? Therefore the expanse of the heavens is the heaven of the heavens, is it not?
Genesis 1:1 reads "God created the heavens..." Not the heaven.
The heavens in verse 1 is not the expanse.
The expanse lies within the heavens... if you consider realistically, that the earth actually is in the heavens. It's a body within space.

However, if you are a flat earther, you might well argue that there is no such thing as space, but that is another argument from this topic.


Of course it was.
That's why there was a watery deep, and why God was able to separate the land from the water, causing mountains and hills, and land masses to form.
The land did not POOF out of thin air.


Thank you.
Yes, the earth already existed, on day one.

I completely dosagree.

Genesis describes ancient Israelite cosmology. You posting photos of maps with Antarctica and Australia is completely anachronistic and has nothing to do with Genesis. There is no Antarctica in the Bible, Moses wouldn't have had any idea about distant continents when he was writing Genesis.

And regarding the heavens and the earth, many translations such as the 1611 KJV actually say that God created the Heaven and the Earth (both singular).

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
King James Version (KJV)

The Hebrew word for heaven, shamayim, is the same both in Genesis 1:1 and in Genesis 1:8. So your second argument is also completely wrong. These verses are not describing two different things. Heaven or the heavens, depending on your translation, is created on day 2 and Earth is created on day 3. Neither is created in 1:1.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

Genesis 1:1 is simply part of an introduction. Nothing actually happens in this verse.

Just as if I said "when I began to ride my bike...." Or "In the beginning when I road my bike..." I'm not actually telling you anything, I'm just introducing you to my story. You would probably be confused as to why my sentence ends before I even finish speaking, because it in and of itself is not an action. It's not an independent clause.

I'll just have to agree to disagree. You may have the last word. Thanks.

 

[CoreyD]

Genesis describes ancient Israelite cosmology. You posting photos of maps with Antarctica and Australia is completely anachronistic and wrong. There is no Antarctica in the Bible. Your post is completely wrong.

You did not read my post and so you missed the reason the map is there.

And regarding the heavens and the earth, many older translations such as the 1611 KJV actually say that God created the Heaven and the earth.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
King James Version (KJV)

The word shamayim is the same both in Genesis 1:1 and in Genesis 1:8. So your second argument is also completely wrong. These verses are not describing two different things. Heaven or the heavens, depending on your translation, is created on day 2 and Earth is created on day 3. Neither is created in 1:1.

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

1:1 is simply part of an introduction. Nothing actually happens in this verse.

I'll just have to agree to disagree. You may have the last word. Thanks.

Because you did not read my post, you won't learn where you went wrong.
Expanse = heaven.
Expanse of the heavens = heaven of the heavens.

The scholars are sensible enough to know that it's not heaven of the heaven, and God created the heaven and the earth, when all through the Bible the heavens is repeatedly referred to, as there isn't just one heaven.

You will always disagree with the Bible, so long as you want to keep false ideas, but this thread is examining the evidence, so feel free to back out as you cannot dispute it.
I am presenting it for the OP, and destroying false arguments and myths. and all their intellectual arrogance that oppose the knowledge of God. We take every thought captive so that it is obedient to Christ, while doing so. 2 Corinthians 10:4, 5

The weapons we use in our fight are not the world's weapons but God's powerful weapons, which we use to destroy strongholds. We destroy false arguments; and all their intellectual arrogance that oppose the knowledge of God. We take every thought captive so that it is obedient to Christ.​

 

[Job 33:6]

You did not read my post and so you missed the reason the map is there.


Because you did not read my post, you won't learn where you went wrong.
Expanse = heaven.
Expanse of the heavens = heaven of the heavens.

The scholars are sensible enough to know that it's not heaven of the heaven, and God created the heaven and the earth, when all through the Bible the heavens is repeatedly referred to, as there isn't just one heaven.

You will always disagree with the Bible, so long as you want to keep false ideas, but this thread is examining the evidence, so feel free to back out as you cannot dispute it.
I am presenting it for the OP, and destroying false arguments and myths. and all their intellectual arrogance that oppose the knowledge of God. We take every thought captive so that it is obedient to Christ, while doing so. 2 Corinthians 10:4, 5

The weapons we use in our fight are not the world's weapons but God's powerful weapons, which we use to destroy strongholds. We destroy false arguments; and all their intellectual arrogance that oppose the knowledge of God. We take every thought captive so that it is obedient to Christ.​

I would say that you're ignoring my posts by not understanding the cosmology of Genesis in light of its ancient Israelite context and cosmology. You're reading the text like it's an astronomy textbook. And that's incorrect.

The Bible is not a science textbook. This text isn't giving a description about the structure of space. It's Ancient Isrealite Cosmology.

On Day 2, God creates the firmament, like setting a fence that defines the boundaries of a park, and He calls it “Heaven.” By establishing the fence, God defines and names the realm of the park. This fence sets the limits of the domain, separating the waters above from the waters below, much like a fence delineates the area for park activity. Then, on Day 4, God places the luminaries, the sun, moon, and stars, inside the park, like putting swings and benches within the fenced area, giving them specific roles to govern day, night, and seasons. In this way, the firmament and Heaven are closely connected: the fence establishes the domain, and the objects placed within it operate in the space it defines. The firmament is called Heaven because it demarcates the heavenly realm.

This is similar to what happens on Day 1 when God creates light and calls it “Day.” Light and day are separate, yet inseparable, it is the light that defines what day is. And it is the firmament that defines what the heavens is.

And the same thing happens on day 3. God calls the dry land Earth. Different, yet inseparable. The dry land defines what the earth is.

And that is creation.

Day 2 represents the creation of the Heavens.
Day 3 the creation of the Earth.

You could even consider the creation of light on Day 1 as part of the broader creation of the heavens.

But more importantly, Genesis 1:1 serves as an introduction, nothing is explicitly created there. The first act of creation is light in verse 3, the first time the text says, “And God said.” God creates through His spoken word, and that is the first time God speaks. God does not speak before Genesis 1:1.

Alright I'm moving on. I have nothing to gain in discussion with people who ignore the ancient near east context of the Bible. If you can't accept the context of the Bible, then there is no point in even discussing what it says.

 

[9Rock9]

Which one is biblical? explain why.

Idk think the Bible really promotes either view, but I also think an old earth isn't inconsistent with a high regard for scripture. The main purpose of the Bible is to point the reader to salvation, not to make scientific claims. God was more concerned with correcting the Ancient Israelites' theology and debunking paganism than he was about teaching them science.

That said, I don't think a week of six, 24 hour days necessarily contradict evolution nor an old earth if we understand Genesis 1 to be a functional creation and the dedication of a cosmic temple rather than a materialistic creation.

 

[Derf]

How does it confirm what you are saying?
Did you not say "If God made the Earth, and then He made something else that He called "Earth", that's confusing"?

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the what you called mud is the same earth that God created at Genesis 1:1.
When that "mud" rose above the surface of the water, it was the same earth that is taking form - mountains, valleys, etc.
It's like having clay in your hand and shaping it into something. It's still clay.

Am I misunderstanding what you think Gen 1:1 is calling "earth"? Are you saying it is the same thing that later became the dry ground? Most people think that it refers to the whole planet we call "Earth" in Vs 1.

God called the dry land “earth,” and the gathering of the waters He called “seas” Genesis 1:10
The dry land always existed, but because it was covered with water, it was wet. When it pushed up above the water's surface, it dried,
God called it earth.
The same earth that existed at the beginning.

I think that's not clear from the scripture, though it is a possible interpretation. Would you say the same thing about "Heaven"? IOW, did "Heaven" exist within the water? If not, then what is Vs 1 talking about when it says "Heaven"?

Is that what you said?


Correct.
Wait a minute! Are you saying there were other objects besides earth. What other objects existed?

Is light an object? If not light, then are you asking about other spheres, such as the sun, moon, stars or something like them that came before? All I get from the scripture at that point is that light existed. If I compare that with modern physics, specifically the big bang theory (BBT), there was a period of time called the photon epoch which might correspond to what God did to create light, before there were other (large) objects, although there was something that preceded the light called "waters" and "the deep". In BBT, there is something that precedes the light also. I'm looking at Big Bang Timeline- The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe while writing. It talks about a "photon epoch"

No. The reason God said let there be light, was because the earth was shrouded in darkness.
Genesis 1:2-5
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep

There was no light for God to separate.

Only after light reached the earth, did God call the light "day", and the darkness "night".

Which is a supposition. Maybe true, maybe not. It requires your view to be true, but other views can still be valid without tossing the verse aside. Such as that the light was made to appear without any mist or atmospheric blockage.

Light from the sun penetrated the dissipating ash and debris that is hanging above earth's atmosphere.
The light is called Day, and the darkness is called Night... Obviously we have night and day on earth.


We don't ignore context, is true, but neither do we ignore chronology.

Also true.

For example, we do not ignore a statement, run further down, form an idea, then arrange the reading to suit our idea.

I don't think it is wrong to apply the whole chapter's context in our understanding of the first few verses.

There is chronological order, in the reading of Genesis Chapter one.
It begins with... In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

That might not be the first event in the chronology. It might instead be an introduction to the chronology, just as Gen 2:1 is not another creation of heaven and earth, and cannot be considered part of the chronology, but just a summation (a short repeat) of the previous contents.

Your claim however, is this:

You made two claims.

1. Light was made first, before there was "Earth", and before there was "Heaven(s)"

Yes

1. I'm trying to read the passage for what it is trying to say, without putting my own ideas

Yes

However, both these claims do not prove to be true, because you just quoted Genesis 1:1, which says very clearly " In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

How long did "the beginning" last" And when were "earth" and "heaven" created? I think I'm still within the window of the 6 days.

If you are "trying to read the passage for what it is trying to say, without putting my own ideas", then you must accept that the heavens and earth existed, first.

Not if the text said that they began to exist only after light.

The only way you can dismiss that, is by "putting my own ideas", which is to claim that earth in Genesis 1:1 is not earth,

Or, as stated before, that it was an introductory statement about the narrative that followed.

but like the other poster here is saying, it's not talking about an already created earth.

So, which is it you want me to go with?


Are you saying that the contexts of "the heavens" never relate to the things in the heavens?

Surely "the heavens" didn't mean "and everything the heavens will contain later on" when it was first defined. Are you saying the "the heavens" existed before "the heavens" were created??

Great!
Do you accept that heavens, in some contexts in scripture, do refer to all the things in the heavens combined?

Yes, at least sometimes. But when the narrative says the heavens were created by separating water above from water below, i don't understand how they existed prior to that.

What thing holds the earth water and sky and space?

Can you repeat that in different words?

Could you answer the other questions, please.
What is space, and how did that blackness impress David? Psalm 8:3

Space is where God placed the stars, planets, galaxies, etc. David was looking at stars in the heavens

When you read the phrase such as mentioned at Isaiah 57:16 and Jeremiah 32:19, since you do not just see empty space and mud, what do you see?

[Isa 57:16 NKJV] For I will not contend forever, Nor will I always be angry; For the spirit would fail before Me, And the souls [which] I have made. --I don't see how this relates to our discussion.
[Jer 32:19 NKJV] '[You are] great in counsel and mighty in work, for Your eyes [are] open to all the ways of the sons of men, to give everyone according to his ways and according to the fruit of his doings. --nor this.

Please elaborate. I'm missing your point.

I'll repeat the verses again:
[Gen 1:1 KJV] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
[Gen 2:1 KJV] Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
The last one is not part of the narrative telling how and in what order God created, yet it is part of the section of scripture containing that narrative. That sentence could be termed a summation of what came before.
The first verse is similar--it isn't part of how and when God created, but is a statement of what the text that follows contains...an introduction, we would call it if writing an english paper. Or perhaps a title. Maybe you didn't understand what I was getting at with the story about making a lamp. I started with a statement about what I was about to describe the creation of (a lamp). The initial statement was not part of the story about how I was making a lamp, it was an introduction to the story about how I was making a lamp.

The assumption that the earth exists before the narrative says the earth exists makes the definition of "earth" confusing, because it is not what the verses define it. The verses of the text define "earth" as "dry land", not a planet where you can only see water. Therefore, if water is all you can see in Vs 2, it must not be the same thing as "earth" as defined in Gen 1:10. If Heaven is vs 1 is not something that came to exist only after the waters were separated from the waters, then there must be 2 things, in your view, that "Heaven" refers to. One in vs 1 and another in vs 8 and following. Whereas, if the introduction is telling us what the narrative is about, rather than being part of the narrative, we soon see the objects/foci of the narrative come into being in Gen 1:6-10.

Did you read Genesis 1:1, 9, 14, 15, 17, 20?
What is the expanse?
What is the expanse of the heavens?

I think they are the same thing--Space, extending down to the surface of the earth (dirt). The "face of the expanse" (still part of the expanse) is the sky where birds fly. "The Heavens" is the name God gave the expanse (firmament).

True. I'm interested in what you Derf, get from it.


Therefore, it does not refer to space, where the heavenly hosts... that is planets and stars would exist?

It does. But remember that the statement begins the narrative in which the heavens and the earth are created. It explains what the words mean as the things the words refer to come into being. If dry land existed prior to dry land existing, then the story of creation is confusing, don't you think? Remember that the narrative defines the words it uses for these things. If you then define them a different way, you need to explain where your definitions come from, and why they don't match the definitions in the narrative.

Ah. I see. So, you believe there is no space above the firmament. That's all a myth in science.

Isn't it? Or do scientists actually know what is outside the universe??

Can yo please point out where, or which layer the sun, moon, and stars reside in this diagram?

None of them. Can you tell me where the waters above the expanse reside?

Also, are you saying there is no space (heavens) above, which God created?

No. But when God made the firmament (expanse) there were a couple parts to it in the narrative. There is the firmament where stars and galaxies are, and there is the "face of the firmament", which is where birds fly.
[Gen 1:20 NKJV] Then God said, "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens."

 

[CoreyD]

I would say that you're ignoring my posts by not understanding the cosmology of Genesis in light of its ancient Israelite context and cosmology. You're reading the text like it's an astronomy textbook. And that's incorrect.

Have you provided any reference to support your expertise as a "Near Easterner expert" though I asked?

Job 33:6 said:​

... But in actuality, for centuries, Jews of antiquity and people of the ancient near east, have understood creation to involve pre existing material.​

Which sounds really strange in English, but when you understand the historical ancient near East background, it's actually a really common way of describing creation and we see this same thing play out in many ancient near east texts.​

I speak English. You do to.. Or are you an ancient Near East human?​

What information can you provide us with that supports your claim that the majority of readers today understand?​

No please.
All you have done is make claims as is common on internet forums, and refuse to back those claims up with anything anyone can verify.
Hence, you only did what any regular John or Jane Doe does on the internet - Make claims and demand that people accept those claims... and on what basis J... On the basis that your username isn't "Anonymous"?

Taking this attitude one actually proclaim themself the expert on Near Eastern context, on these forums, and the only advanced expert in this field of understanding.... No scholar can surpass.

The news you may not have heard is... On forums, a claim can be dismissed, and ignored, even more so when the one making those claims prove incapable of supporting them.
I have nothing to actually address, but I have repeatedly demonstrated that such claims are not only empty, but false.
I addressed every one of your posts.

The claims are empty. They have no support.

The Bible is not a science textbook. This text isn't giving a description about the structure of space. It's Ancient Isrealite Cosmology.

It's God's word... written for people living today... as referenced by Jesus and his apostle.
Paul said we should understand and benefit from them. Romans 15:4
Jesus referred to Genesis, as well. Matthew 19:4
The book is not beyond Englishmen.

On Day 2, God creates the firmament, like setting a fence that defines the boundaries of a park, and He calls it “Heaven.” By establishing the fence, God defines and names the realm of the park. This fence sets the limits of the domain, separating the waters above from the waters below, much like a fence delineates the area for park activity. Then, on Day 4, God places the luminaries, the sun, moon, and stars, inside the park, like putting swings and benches within the fenced area, giving them specific roles to govern day, night, and seasons. In this way, the firmament and Heaven are closely connected: the fence establishes the domain, and the objects placed within it operate in the space it defines. The firmament is called Heaven because it demarcates the heavenly realm.

Another thing you have done is followed the pattern that is common on these forums.
Ignore posts with pointed questions and facts that you don't know how to respond to, so you claim you are done... only to return and preach your idea, in the hope that you can bypass the post.

It not happening. I'm very much alert to that evasive tactic.
You obviously made statements that are flawed and want to ignore them.
Let me remind you...

Note please...
Genesis 2:1 So the creation of the heavens and the earth and everything in them was completed.
Genesis 2:4 This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

The creation refers to all of God's creation.
That is, every physical thing that God wanted to exist.
God was finished with physical creation on day six, and rested from all his physical works.
Jesus made that clear when he said “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” John 5:17

This is not physical creative works which were completed.
Rather, God is working to see his will come to a completion. Matthew 6:10; Ephesians 1:10
So, the six creative days, which are really periods, as is made clear in Genesis 2:4, which refers to them as one day, involved all of physical creation.

The YEC position also plainly denies several legitimate Bible translations.

Example:
Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

That is not legitimate, because it ignore the Hebrew noun for beginning, and replaces it with a verb, thereby assuming authority to change the text to suit a manmade doctrine.
Jesus condemned that. Mark 7:6, 7

This is similar to what happens on Day 1 when God creates light and calls it “Day.” Light and day are separate, yet inseparable, it is the light that defines what day is. And it is the firmament that defines what the heavens is.

And the same thing happens on day 3. God calls the dry land Earth. Different, yet inseparable. The dry land defines what the earth is.

And that is creation.

Day 2 represents the creation of the Heavens.
Day 3 the creation of the Earth.

You could even consider the creation of light on Day 1 as part of the broader creation of the heavens.

But more importantly, Genesis 1:1 serves as an introduction, nothing is explicitly created there. The first act of creation is light in verse 3, the first time the text says, “And God said.” God creates through His spoken word, and that is the first time God speaks. God does not speak before Genesis 1:1.

You're simply repeating what I addressed, in my posts you ignored.
Here it is...

Genesis 1:6-10 ESV
[6] And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” [7] And God made the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so. [8] And God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

This is God creating. No one should argue that God isn't actually creating anything here. He is creating the heavens and the earth. That's what the 6 days of Genesis are about.
Click to expand...

No J.
The heaven that God here creates, is the expanse, where the birds fly, etc. See this post.
It's not the heavens. That's why from Genesis 1:14-18, we read "heaven / expanse of the heavens"
Did you not read that... expanse of the heavens?
Then read it again, as it is described. The expanse is heaven, right? Therefore the expanse of the heavens is the heaven of the heavens, is it not?
Genesis 1:1 reads "God created the heavens..." Not the heaven.
The heavens in verse 1 is not the expanse.
The expanse lies within the heavens... if you consider realistically, that the earth actually is in the heavens. It's a body within space.

This translation doesn't say that God created the heavens and the Earth in verse 1:1, rather it says that when God began to create them, the earth was complete chaos/formless. For how long before that moment in time? The text doesn't say. The beginning is with relation to God's actions, not with relation to material existence of the earth.

Exactly. The text misrepresent God's word, and disregard's its author.
How presumptuous! A sin that is punishable by death. Just wait for it.
Their time is fast approaching.

And yet, YECs will demand that this is what Genesis 1:1 states, that creation in Genesis is a material ex nihilo creation. Despite the Hebrew word bara not meaning that. And they'll insist that the heavens and the earth are created in verse 1:1 despite many translations plainly not saying that at all.

I an not a YEC, and I do not believe in ex nihilo creation.
God created everything from his abundant energy and power. He did not create from nothing.

Alright I'm moving on. I have nothing to gain in discussion with people who ignore the ancient near east context of the Bible. If you can't accept the context of the Bible, then there is no point in even discussing what it says.

So, I have the last word for real, this time.
I haven't ignored the contexts of the Bible.
If I did, you would address my posts, but since I used the context to expose your errors, you ignored them.

You can't deal with them, can you.

1. 
   The heaven that God here creates, is the expanse, where the birds fly, etc. See this post.
   It's not the heavens. That's why from Genesis 1:14-18, we read "heaven / expanse of the heavens"
   Did you not read that... expanse of the heavens?
   Then read it again, as it is described. The expanse is heaven, right? Therefore the expanse of the heavens is the heaven of the heavens, is it not?
   Genesis 1:1 reads "God created the heavens..." Not the heaven.
   The heavens in verse 1 is not the expanse.
   The expanse lies within the heavens... if you consider realistically, that the earth actually is in the heavens. It's a body within space.
   
2. 
   

   I would say that these verse are more about organizing, separating, ordering things. Rather than ex nihilo creating things. Gathering waters, separating them, separating light from dark.

   My question here is, would you say the waters were created by God, or the water had no beginning?
   Would you deny that God created the waters that covered the earth?
   
3. 
   

   And we see this elsewhere as well:
   Psalm 104:2, 5 ESV
   [2] covering yourself with light as with a garment, stretching out the heavens like a tent.
   [5] He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.
   
   Taking the heavens that are already there and stretching them out.

   My question here would be, would you deny that God created the heavens and then stretched them out?
   Would you object to that?
   Isaiah 44:24
   This is what the LORD says, He who is your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb: “I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself And spreading out the earth alone,
   
4. 
   

   Moving water is creation. Because that is in fact what God does during the 6 days of creation.

   Yes, but that is not creating the water.
   God created seas, which is the body of water moved by the land to form seas.
   
   
   
   
   
   Can you see the seas?
   Can you see the oceans?
   What are the differences?
   
   Oceans and seas are both large bodies of saltwater, but they differ primarily in size, depth, and geographical location. Oceans are vast, deep, and continuous expanses of water that cover approximately 71% of Earth's surface, forming one interconnected global ocean.
   Seas, in contrast, are generally smaller, shallower, and are typically partially enclosed by land, often located at the margins of oceans where they meet continents or islands.
   While seas are part of the larger ocean system, they are distinguished by their proximity to land and often have unique ecological and geographical characteristics.
   
   God created seas from the existing body of water described as the watery deep.
   The seas did not exist until the earth move, but the body of water existed before.
   God is not now creating the body of water again. That would be ridiculous to say.
   The seas are a new creation. They have now come into existence with the movement of the earth.
   

See. I'm the one reading your posts, and responding, and using the scriptures in their entirety... connecting them.
Hardly can that be considered ignoring.
You, on the contrary...

 

[Job 33:6]

Have you provided any reference to support your expertise as a "Near Easterner expert" though I asked?
Job 33:6 said:
... But in actuality, for centuries, Jews of antiquity and people of the ancient near east, have understood creation to involve pre existing material.

Well sure. Rashi is an example of a renown Jew of antiquity that acknowledges that Genesis 1:1 was not an event but rather part of an introductory statement. And you can read his commentary here:

Genesis 1:1

When God began to create*When God began to create Others “In the beginning God created.” heaven and...

www.sefaria.org

You can see the matter being discussed here in Genesis Rabba:

Bereshit Rabbah 1:5

Rav Huna began in the name of bar Kapara: “May they be silenced [te’alamna], those lying lips [that speak harsh words against the righteous one with arrogance...

www.sefaria.org

And I gave reference to the wisdom of solomon earlier.

Bible Gateway passage: Wisdom of Solomon 11:17 - New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears or bold lions

www.biblegateway.com

Wisdom of Solomon 11:17
For your all-powerful hand,
which created the world out of formless matter,
did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears or bold lions

And it's well known that this is how Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Canaanites, and more understood creation of the cosmos in extra biblical texts.

And all of the above and many more acknowledges that the text describes ancient Israelite cosmology. And there are perhaps a couple dozen references to Jews of antiquity, early church fathers, and ancient near east references found in this video here:

The construct translation of the Bible and the understanding that creation begins in verse 3, not verse 1, in which God creates order out of pre existing matter, has been around and has been debated since the dawn of time. And this includes among Jewish experts of Torah.

 

[CoreyD]

Am I misunderstanding what you think Gen 1:1 is calling "earth"? Are you saying it is the same thing that later became the dry ground? Most people think that it refers to the whole planet we call "Earth" in Vs 1.

I don't think you are misunderstanding, and I don't think anything about Genesis 1:1.
I simply read it as it is, and took it as that, without adding an idea to it.

Reading Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Reading Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

Reading Psalm 136:5-6
5 To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever. 6 To him that stretched out the earth above the waters: for his mercy endureth for ever.

Reading Isaiah 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Reading Isaiah 51:13 And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth. . .
Reading Jeremiah 51:15 He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heaven by his understanding.

The scriptures say God created the heavens and the earth and stretched them out.
You don't mistake earth for something other than earth in the scriptures... whether it be Genesis 1:1, or the other scriptures.

I think that's not clear from the scripture, though it is a possible interpretation.

Genesis 1:9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”
You don't think "Let the dry land appear" means the land magically appeared, do you?
What is the water resting on? Did you imagine it's suspended on nothing?

Would you say the same thing about "Heaven"? IOW, did "Heaven" exist within the water? If not, then what is Vs 1 talking about when it says "Heaven"?

Why would you imagine the heaven existed in the water?
It's quite clear the expanse was created, by separating the water and lifting water above. Thus there was water above the atmosphere and below.
I did illustrate that, didn't I?

Day 2 begins
Genesis 1:6-8
And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters, to separate the waters from the waters.”
So God made the expanse and separated the waters beneath it from the waters above. And it was so.

Description : What is happening...
Water vapor is taken up above the earth, and the earth's atmosphere is formed.
The expanse between the waters below , and the waters suspended in space, is called heaven.

This heaven is the sky where birds and airplanes fly.
As I said, this is not the heavens in Genesis 1:1

Is light an object?

No.
A light or luminary, is a light source.
Light is electromagnetic radiation that can be detected by the human eye, occupying a narrow range of wavelengths typically between 380 and 750 nanometres.
Source 1 2

If not light, then are you asking about other spheres, such as the sun, moon, stars or something like them that came before?

To my statement, "I hope we do agree it was the light on the earth."
Derf said:
Yes, but not necessarily only on earth, right?

So, you tell me what did you have in mind?

All I get from the scripture at that point is that light existed. If I compare that with modern physics, specifically the big bang theory (BBT), there was a period of time called the photon epoch which might correspond to what God did to create light, before there were other (large) objects, although there was something that preceded the light called "waters" and "the deep". In BBT, there is something that precedes the light also. I'm looking at Big Bang Timeline- The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe while writing. It talks about a "photon epoch"

Light has a source.
If the source id not the sun, you are saying God used another light source. Isn't that so?

Which is a supposition. Maybe true, maybe not. It requires your view to be true, but other views can still be valid without tossing the verse aside. Such as that the light was made to appear without any mist or atmospheric blockage.

Light was made to appear where... in space? Why? Isn't the focus on the earth?

Also true.

I don't think it is wrong to apply the whole chapter's context in our understanding of the first few verses.

Then why not admit that you aren't trying to read the passage for what it is trying to say, without putting your own ideas?

That might not be the first event in the chronology. It might instead be an introduction to the chronology, just as Gen 2:1 is not another creation of heaven and earth, and cannot be considered part of the chronology, but just a summation (a short repeat) of the previous contents.

Genesis 1 being the event, and Genesis 2 being the history, is reading the text as it is, without putting our own ideas/
Since you think it's okay to put your own ideas, we aren't going to reach any scriptural conclusion.

How long did "the beginning" last" And when were "earth" and "heaven" created? I think I'm still within the window of the 6 days.

One period called a day in God's time. Genesis 2:4; John 1:1; John 8:44

Not if the text said that they began to exist only after light.

It does not. Therefore... ?

Or, as stated before, that it was an introductory statement about the narrative that followed.

That's someone's idea.

Surely "the heavens" didn't mean "and everything the heavens will contain later on" when it was first defined. Are you saying the "the heavens" existed before "the heavens" were created??

Are you saying that the contexts of "the heavens" never relate to the things in the heavens?
What is the heaven of the heavens?

Yes, at least sometimes. But when the narrative says the heavens were created by separating water above from water below, i don't understand how they existed prior to that.

Are they more than one heaven mentioned in the Bible?
If yes, why are you saying the heavens of Genesis 1:1 is the same as Genesis 1:14-18, and why are you saying heaven of the heavens refer to one and the same heaven?

Can you repeat that in different words?

There were your words that I did not understand.
Derf said:

Eh? No. Remember that I didn't say "empty" on purpose.​

The thing that holds the earth above the water and sky and space and what they contain.​

Space is where God placed the stars, planets, galaxies, etc. David was looking at stars in the heavens

You believe space is the expanse. okay.

[Isa 57:16 NKJV] For I will not contend forever, Nor will I always be angry; For the spirit would fail before Me, And the souls [which] I have made. --I don't see how this relates to our discussion.
[Jer 32:19 NKJV] '[You are] great in counsel and mighty in work, for Your eyes [are] open to all the ways of the sons of men, to give everyone according to his ways and according to the fruit of his doings. --nor this.


I'll repeat the verses again:
[Gen 1:1 KJV] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
[Gen 2:1 KJV] Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
The last one is not part of the narrative telling how and in what order God created, yet it is part of the section of scripture containing that narrative. That sentence could be termed a summation of what came before.
The first verse is similar--it isn't part of how and when God created, but is a statement of what the text that follows contains...an introduction, we would call it if writing an english paper. Or perhaps a title. Maybe you didn't understand what I was getting at with the story about making a lamp. I started with a statement about what I was about to describe the creation of (a lamp). The initial statement was not part of the story about how I was making a lamp, it was an introduction to the story about how I was making a lamp.

The assumption that the earth exists before the narrative says the earth exists makes the definition of "earth" confusing, because it is not what the verses define it. The verses of the text define "earth" as "dry land", not a planet where you can only see water. Therefore, if water is all you can see in Vs 2, it must not be the same thing as "earth" as defined in Gen 1:10. If Heaven is vs 1 is not something that came to exist only after the waters were separated from the waters, then there must be 2 things, in your view, that "Heaven" refers to. One in vs 1 and another in vs 8 and following. Whereas, if the introduction is telling us what the narrative is about, rather than being part of the narrative, we soon see the objects/foci of the narrative come into being in Gen 1:6-10.

We covered this.
It's the same earth that the land came from.
The dirt under your feet is earth, because you are standing on earth.
What do they drill down into... not the earth?

I think they are the same thing--Space, extending down to the surface of the earth (dirt). The "face of the expanse" (still part of the expanse) is the sky where birds fly. "The Heavens" is the name God gave the expanse (firmament).

Earth is in the heavens, yes, but there are heavens. Not one heaven... according to the scriptures.

 

[Job 33:6]

That is not legitimate, because it ignore the Hebrew noun for beginning, and replaces it with a verb, thereby assuming authority to change the text to suit a manmade doctrine.
Jesus condemned that. Mark 7:6, 7

The construct form translations of the Bible are legitimate. And if your position relies on denying Bible translations, then that's evidence enough that your position is the one that is illegitimate. You're denying the NRSVue, You're denying the CEB and the YLT. You're denying hybrid translations like the NABRE and NRSV. You're denying the BHS as well.

And similar to your denial of the historical context of scripture, no discussion can be had if your position relies on denial of Bible translations.

I won't call this response heresy, but I will strongly disagree with the approach of denying various Bible translations.

 

[CoreyD]

Isn't it? Or do scientists actually know what is outside the universe??

The universe is the heavens, isn't it.
It's not heaven where birds and airplanes traverse.
What is the heavens of heavens, or heaven of heavens mentioned in these verses? Deuteronomy 10:14; 1 Kings 8:27

None of them. Can you tell me where the waters above the expanse reside?

Resided. The waters are no longer there since the floodgates of the heavens burst open. Genesis 7:11,
I would guess the water was somewhere above the Mesosphere.
It's only a guess as I don't know.
Can you give me a rough idea where the sun, moon and stars traverse?

No. But when God made the firmament (expanse) there were a couple parts to it in the narrative. There is the firmament where stars and galaxies are, and there is the "face of the firmament", which is where birds fly.
[Gen 1:20 NKJV] Then God said, "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens."

You speak as though you believe the firmament is a solid dome, rather than a region of atmosphere.
Am I reading you correctly?

 

[Job 33:6]

Resided. The waters are no longer there since the floodgates of the heavens burst open. Genesis 7:11,
I would guess the water was somewhere above the Mesosphere.
It's only a guess as I don't know.
Can you give me a rough idea where the sun, moon and stars traverse?

Except for where the waters above are referenced in the Bible after the flood, such as:
Psalm 148:4-6 ESV
[4] Praise him, you highest heavens, and you waters above the heavens! [5] Let them praise the name of the Lord! For he commanded and they were created. [6] And he established them forever and ever; he gave a decree, and it shall not pass away.

Also, the floodgates not only bursted open, they also closed back up and restrained the waters above:
Genesis 8:2 ESV
[2] The fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained

 

[CoreyD]

Have you provided any reference to support your expertise as a "Near Easterner expert" though I asked?
Job 33:6 said:
... But in actuality, for centuries, Jews of antiquity and people of the ancient near east, have understood creation to involve pre existing material.

Well sure. Rashi is an example of a renown Jew of antiquity that acknowledges that Genesis 1:1 was not an event but rather part of an introductory statement. And you can read his commentary here:

Genesis 1:1

When God began to create*When God began to create Others “In the beginning God created.” heaven and...

www.sefaria.org

Rashi who?
Does Rashi have a last name, or is he the only Rashi in the world?
At what time period did Rashi live?

Ancient Jewish scholars, including rabbis from the Talmudic period, generally interpreted Genesis 1:1 as affirming the concept of creatio ex nihilo—the belief that God created the heavens and the earth from nothing. This view was supported by prominent figures such as Rambam (Maimonides) and Ramban (Nachmanides), who saw the verse as foundational to Jewish theology, emphasizing that before creation, there was nothing except God. The Talmudic tradition, as reflected in the interpretation of the opening letter bet in Bereshit, suggests that inquiry into what existed before creation is not permitted, reinforcing the idea that time itself began with creation.

Jewish scholars have offered diverse interpretations of Genesis 1:1.

Despite these diverse views, the majority of ancient rabbis understood the creation account as literal in its core message: that God is the sole creator of the universe, and that creation began with a divine act of will. The idea that the world was created from pre-existing matter was generally rejected, as it was seen as incompatible with strict monotheism, which holds that God alone is eternal and self-sufficient.

...ancient Jewish scholars consistently affirmed the divine origin of creation, with the event described in Genesis 1:1 serving as a cornerstone of Jewish faith and cosmology.
Sources 1 2

You can see the matter being discussed here in Genesis Rabba:

Bereshit Rabbah 1:5

Rav Huna began in the name of bar Kapara: “May they be silenced [te’alamna], those lying lips [that speak harsh words against the righteous one with arrogance...

www.sefaria.org

And I gave reference to the wisdom of solomon earlier.

Bible Gateway passage: Wisdom of Solomon 11:17 - New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears or bold lions

www.biblegateway.com

You ignored my response to that, and did not respond.
Sounds like something someone plagiarized and adjusted.
I would not use text like these that are known to be later additions to the existing Canon
Why would you use "deuterocanonical" writings, when they have "myriads of inconsistencies"?

Remember, Wisdom of Solomon is not an "Old Testament" writing.
It does not belong to the protocanonical writings, and are questionable.

And it's well known that this is how Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Canaanites, and more understood creation of the cosmos in extra biblical texts.

Well known by whom?
So far, I have only your word. Nothing tangible, and since this Rashi is vastly outnumbered, you have nothing of substance to support your claims.

And all of the above and many more acknowledges that the text describes ancient Israelite cosmology. And there are perhaps a couple dozen references to Jews of antiquity, early church fathers, and ancient near east references found in this video here:

Perhaps... Perhaps there are many more interpretations, like these.
Some scholars, like Philo of Alexandria, approached the passage allegorically, viewing the "days" of creation not as literal 24-hour periods but as symbolic stages of divine wisdom or logical order. The Targumim, ancient Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible, offered alternative renderings; for example, the Targum of Onkelos translates Bereshit as "In Antiquity," suggesting a non-literal understanding of "beginning". Similarly, the Targum Neofiti I introduces the concept of the "Word" (Memra) of the Lord as the agent of creation, reflecting a more philosophical and mystical interpretation.

The construct translation of the Bible and the understanding that creation begins in verse 3, not verse 1, in which God creates order out of pre existing matter, has been around and has been debated since the dawn of time. And this includes among Jewish experts of Torah.

Not according to Jewish rabbis and ancient Jewish scholars... and no, there is no consensus among so called Jewish experts... wherever you smuggled that in from.

The construct form translations of the Bible are legitimate. And if your position relies on denying Bible translations, then that's evidence enough that your position is the one that is illegitimate. You're denying the NRSVue, You're denying the CEB and the YLT. You're denying hybrid translations like the NABRE and NRSV. You're denying the BHS as well.

And similar to your denial of the historical context of scripture, no discussion can be had if your position relies on denial of Bible translations.

I won't call this response heresy, but I will strongly disagree with the approach of denying various Bible translations.

According to reliable sources, some Bible translations alter words, and this occurs due to differences in translation philosophy, manuscript evidence, and linguistic challenges. Translators may omit, add, or change words based on their interpretation of the original texts, which were written in ancient languages like Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. For example, a table comparing modern Bible versions to the King James Version (KJV) shows that words like "Christ," "Lord," "Jesus," and "God" are omitted or added in various translations, with some versions adding or removing words in hundreds of instances.

Like everyone else, we have the God given right to reject alterations to God's word the Bible.
Religious freedom also allows us the right to do so... just as you have the right to look for a translated text that suits or supports your ideas.

The fact is, the Hebrew manuscripts do not use a verb, which some translations of Genesis 1:1 alter, which you favor.
The Hebrew manuscripts uses a noun, which I accept.
Do you fault me for loving honesty? Do you love dishonesty?
We all have freedom to make that choice.

4QGenb (4Q2)
You can grab any manuscript, and if you can read it, it says very plainly, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
I do reject dishonest translations, that interpret text and then translate base on their interpretation.

Feel free to duck out when you are ready, J.

 

[Job 33:6]

See. I'm the one reading your posts, and responding, and using the scriptures in their entirety... connecting them.
Hardly can that be considered ignoring.
You, on the contrary...

Denying translations is not responding, that's just denial. You can't say, these translations are illegitimate, and then that's your only response. That's not a response at all.

 

[CoreyD]

Denying translations is not responding, that's just denial. You can't say, these translations are illegitimate, and then that's your only response. That's not a response at all.

I explained why, and pointed out the flaw.
If you did not dodge the post, you would have read it.

 

[CoreyD]

Except for where the waters above are referenced in the Bible after the flood, such as:
Psalm 148:4-6 ESV
[4] Praise him, you highest heavens, and you waters above the heavens! [5] Let them praise the name of the Lord! For he commanded and they were created. [6] And he established them forever and ever; he gave a decree, and it shall not pass away.

Also, the floodgates not only bursted open, they also closed back up and restrained the waters above:
Genesis 8:2 ESV
[2] The fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained

Thank you.
I can accept that, as it is there in the scriptures.
The water does not exceed the highest heavens, so that tells us there are heavens above the expanse.
Do you accept that?

 

[Job 33:6]

Rashi who?
Does Rashi have a last name, or is he the only Rashi in the world?
At what time period did Rashi live?

Rashi who? What do you mean Rashi who? You don't know who Rashi is, of course you don't know.

https://academic.oup.com/book/36506

Rashi - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Probably the most famous Rabbi of the Middle ages.

Just because you don't know about the history of Bible interpretation doesn't mean that these ideas didn't exist.

 

[Job 33:6]

I explained why, and pointed out the flaw.
If you did not dodge the post, you would have read it.

You didn't explain anything. You just denied a plethora of Bible translations, called them illegitimate.

That's not an argument. That's denial. Like you're some kind of Hebrew expert and all these Bibles written by hundreds of Hebrew scholars are all wrong because you said so on an internet forum.

That's just hubris. That's not an argument.

Denial of the Bible is not a valid argument. Saying that only some translations are right and all these other ones are wrong. That's not valid at all. You can't just disregard a bunch of translations just because you don't like what they say.

 

[Jerry N.]

This thread is a bit confusing. Let me tell a little joke I’ve told before. An atheist comes to God and says that science has advanced so much that mankind doesn’t need Him anymore. God says that He will leave mankind alone if mankind makes a human being out of dust. The atheist agrees and reaches down and scoops up some dust. God says, “Wait a minute, make your own dust.” Job seems to be saying that “something” existed before Genesis 1:3, and God used that “something” for the next six days to create everything on earth. The verses about creation that have been repeated in this thread make it clear that God created everything. Why is it a problem if God created that “something” before the first of the six days?