7 Day creation- literal or figurative?

[pinkmatter]

I'm after thoughts and opinions Gods 7-day creation. Did Moses right it as a narrative to the Israelites? Is Genesis all figurative language?

Thoughts and opinions on the controversial topic!

 

[miamited]

hi pm,

As I read it, He did it in 7 evenings and mornings, although He doesn't list the seventh.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[juvenissun]

I'm after thoughts and opinions Gods 7-day creation. Did Moses right it as a narrative to the Israelites? Is Genesis all figurative language?

Thoughts and opinions on the controversial topic!

I like to answer your questions with more details. But I need more questions.

So far, my answer to your question is: No. Gen 1-11 are not "all" figurative language. At least (very rough estimation), half of the text (may up to 90%) could be understood literally (with a lot of interpretations).

I am not sure about the length of the "day". But the sequence of the day events is perfectly understandable literally.

 

[pinkmatter]

I'm not asking in order to make my own opinion or anything, I'm just asking for different peoples opinions on the topic. It will so help me with an essay, too! So really the only question is "do you think God created the world in 7 literal days?"

Thanks =)

 

[mark kennedy]

I'm after thoughts and opinions Gods 7-day creation. Did Moses right it as a narrative to the Israelites? Is Genesis all figurative language?

Thoughts and opinions on the controversial topic!

Yes, life on earth was created, in six literal days and it didn't take all day to do it. The term 'figurative' has a very distinctive meaning in Biblical exposition, it is usually indicated by a 'like' or 'as' in the immediate context. As a matter of fact Genesis isn't really known for it's figurative language, it's always been understood as an historical narrative.

I don't get how there is something controversial about it, with Genesis you either believe it or you don't. What it actually says isn't really all that hard to decipher.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm not asking in order to make my own opinion or anything, I'm just asking for different peoples opinions on the topic. It will so help me with an essay, too! So really the only question is "do you think God created the world in 7 literal days?"

Thanks =)

If so, we need to define what is a Day. Genesis says a Day is the time period between one morning and the next morning.

It depends on where you are in the universe and when in the universe, this time period could be varied in length.

With that said, then yes, it means a literal day.

 

[watchman333]

Hi PM, Writing an essay, huh? The good old days! No, in my opinion, each day as is 1,000 years as stated in 11Peter, chapter 3. Now, that is not to say God could'nt do it in 7 literal days. In any case, if you want to do a study on this, check out the meanings of 6 & 7 in Biblical numerics. I believe we are at the end of the 6th day, from Adam, and the 7th day will be the final, millennial day.

 

[keitellf]

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter. The purpose of the Bible is to exalt God and show His power, mercy, sacrifice, and love. The creation story in its nature is theological. It shows the power of God in everything. Day one is very cool because it says that God created light without the sun, moon, stars, etc. So it also shows that God isn't bound by human standards or laws. God is God, He is above everything. I'm actually doing a bit of research myself in this subjects as well as other theories such as gap theory (which I don't agree with by the way).

 

[jilfe]

Here are some verses recorded by moses, when God Himself was speaking on this very subject.
As He was bringing forth the written law unto Israel.

Ex:20:11: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Ex:31:17: It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
18: And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

It is made very clear by God Himself,

I hope this is some help for your essay.
　
　
　

 

[Partaker of Christ]

Six literal days!

[FONT=&quot]Anything other than that is ‘Did God actually say?’ [/FONT]

 

[Johnnz]

Listen to John Walton's two longer talks on YouTube and you will get some worthwhile insights into this issue.

John
NZ

 

[KTskater]

I believe that the language used to describe creation was the best it could be to suit the people that it was written by. What I mean by this is that a dense scientific explanation of how God set up the laws of physics and brought the universe and its contents into existence was not the point of Genesis 1:1-11. It's purpose was simply to show God as creator. The rest of the story about the garden was to show that man had rejected God and thus justified the Levical laws, and later on, would give explanation to the Gospel.

Was it literal language? I doubt it. Was it written in a way that served God's purposes? Most definitely.

 

[Willbyr]

I consider the method of creation described in Genesis 1 non-literal but the ideas it embodies very true. This is because the Bible is not always utterly accurate in every scientific respect, but it is still the word of Gd and we can learn much from it. The first creation story is a beautiful poem glorifying Gd, his power, and the wonder of the world around us; this idea remains even though all the scientific evidence I've looked at points to the world being older than 6,000 - 10,000 years. Science can work with the Bible, and the concept of Gd making a massive explosion calibrated so precisely as to cause humans to form is just as amazing to me as the concept of literal creation.

Does that make sense? I'm very happy to answer questions about my beliefs that are asked in good faith.

 

[Greg1234]

I consider the method of creation described in Genesis 1 non-literal but the ideas it embodies very true. This is because the Bible is not always utterly accurate in every scientific respect, but it is still the word of Gd and we can learn much from it. The first creation story is a beautiful poem glorifying Gd, his power, and the wonder of the world around us; this idea remains even though all the scientific evidence I've looked at points to the world being older than 6,000 - 10,000 years. Science can work with the Bible, and the concept of Gd making a massive explosion calibrated so precisely as to cause humans to form is just as amazing to me as the concept of literal creation.

Does that make sense? I'm very happy to answer questions about my beliefs that are asked in good faith.

Thank's for sharing. Let's remember that the directions and teachings given in the bible are to be studied and applied to self. Such activity is all too lacking or diluted in the world.

 

[ptomwebster]

I'm not asking in order to make my own opinion or anything, I'm just asking for different peoples opinions on the topic. It will so help me with an essay, too! So really the only question is "do you think God created the world in 7 literal days?"

Thanks =)

Yes, seven 1,000 year long days.

 

[Rubiks]

Unfortunately, me being one of those science-minded folks makes me have to believe it is non-literal. The method of creation is not the message. The fact that all the universe was created by God is the message.

 

[aiki]

If read honestly, without bias formed from a prior allegiance to science, the Genesis accounts of Creation are clearly intended to be understood to have occurred in 7 literal days. It is from this interpretation of the Creation account that God, through Moses, commands that the seventh day of the week be a day of holy rest. If the days of Creation were of some enormous length - perhaps billions of years in duration - then Exodus 20:8-11 makes no sense.

Selah.

 

[Johnnz]

If read honestly, without bias formed from a prior allegiance to science, the Genesis accounts of Creation are clearly intended to be understood to have occurred in 7 literal days. It is from this interpretation of the Creation account that God, through Moses, commands that the seventh day of the week be a day of holy rest. If the days of Creation were of some enormous length - perhaps billions of years in duration - then Exodus 20:8-11 makes no sense.
Selah.

Did you look at the John Walton talks I referred to above?

John
NZ

 

[Partaker of Christ]

I consider the method of creation described in Genesis 1 non-literal but the ideas it embodies very true. This is because the Bible is not always utterly accurate in every scientific respect, but it is still the word of Gd and we can learn much from it. The first creation story is a beautiful poem glorifying Gd, his power, and the wonder of the world around us; this idea remains even though all the scientific evidence I've looked at points to the world being older than 6,000 - 10,000 years. Science can work with the Bible, and the concept of Gd making a massive explosion calibrated so precisely as to cause humans to form is just as amazing to me as the concept of literal creation.

Does that make sense? I'm very happy to answer questions about my beliefs that are asked in good faith.

I could be wrong, but I tend to think that this “non-literal” view of Genesis 1, is a pretty new theory brought about by modern day science. I would doubt that the “non-literal” view was even considered as a possible theory among Christians before the days of Darwin.

Many modern day Christians have changed from “In the beginning God” to “In the beginning science” in order to attempt to make the two compatible, and to avoid being laughed at by the scoffers.

 

[Papias]

Partaker wrote:

I could be wrong, but I tend to think that this “non-literal” view of Genesis 1, is a pretty new theory brought about by modern day science.

You are.

I would doubt that the “non-literal” view was even considered as a possible theory among Christians before the days of Darwin.

Then you clearly haven't read much from St. Augustine, Origen, and other early Christians who wrote about a non-literal reading of Genesis. No early Christians wrote about questioning the morality of having slaves, but some did write about non-literal readings of Genesis.

Papias