Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

[Job 33:6]

You are trying really hard to fit the Bible into science. Why are you trying so hard? You can't explain everything you know. Jesus made wine - good strong aged wine - on the spot out of water. How does that fit into science? It doesn't. He rose from the dead. That doesn't fit either. He got a real physical body after He rose, He ate, He drank, Thomas touched Him, and He also walked through walls and appeared and disappeared at will and eventually floated up into the sky. You can't explain any of it with science.

You see, you are trying so hard, but it makes no sense. (no offense). Because if, as you say, Moses writes about election - well, somehow man had to evolve to be like God and to be capable of his calling. If God is calling man to be ruler over creation, than man had to be intelligent, creative, abstract thinker, capable of knowing right and wrong, capable of having a relationship with an invisible God. Capable of prayer, of grasping theological concepts, etc. And now this is where biology comes in. No animal in the world has a brain like ours. God had to make our brain to suit the purpose He had for us. In making us in His image, He had to give us anatomy that could support these functions. See where I am going with this?

I'll try this, let's take a look at the word "Asah",

It's used interchangeably depending on the passage with bara. For example Exodus states that God Asah The heavens and the Earth.

But what does this word actually mean?

God created the Israelites. Does that mean that God made Israelites out of nothing? That's dueteronomy 32 6, Psalm 149:2, Hosea 8:14 etc.

God creates each day, that Psalm 118:24. What is that even mean?

God created The human spirit, Zechariah 12:1.

God created north and south, Psalm 89:12. What is that supposed to mean? How does someone create that? It's not a material object.

God made the moon to mark seasons, Psalm 104:19, that's not about material manufacturing, That's about making an object to do something. Designating it to do something, a purpose.


In Exodus 31:16, the word is translated " celebrate" God celebrated the Sabbath.

In first Kings 12:31, priests are created. This time it's translated as appointed.

Exodus 1:21, God created families, for midwives.

Did God make these people appear out of thin air for these midwives?

You see, to make, or to create, is commonly used in the Bible to mean "appoint" or "designate" etc.

Creating not materialistically, but creating for purposes and meaning. Appointing. Electing etc.

 

[olgamc]

The gospel of John: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made."

Genesis: "and God said let there be light, and there was light. ...and God said ... and God made ... God said ... God maid" over and over and over again.

So no, I do not think that Genesis talks about electing. Biblically, Genesis talks about making or fashioning.

Chapter 1 - God makes mankind in His likeness, male and female. God blesses mankind and tells them to be fruitful and multiply. Day 6 is done, God rests.
Chapter 2 - overlaps with chapter 1. It begins in day 6, God makes the man from the dust of the earth, whatever that means. There are no animals that can be a suitable companion for the man. God makes the woman from the man's side, whatever that means. At some later time, call it day 8, the man and the woman sin. God names the man Adam, which means "the first man". Adam names his wife Eve, which means "mother of living". They go on making babies, which is what God told them to do back on day 6 when He made them.

That's what it says.

 

[olgamc]

I'll try this, let's take a look at the word "Asah",

It's used interchangeably depending on the passage with bara. For example Exodus states that God Asah The heavens and the Earth.

But what does this word actually mean?

God created the Israelites. Does that mean that God made Israelites out of nothing? That's dueteronomy 32 6, Psalm 149:2, Hosea 8:14 etc.

God creates each day, that Psalm 118:24. What is that even mean?

God created The human spirit, Zechariah 12:1.

God created north and south, Psalm 89:12. What is that supposed to mean? How does someone create that? It's not a material object.

God made the moon to mark seasons, Psalm 104:19, that's not about material manufacturing, That's about making an object to do something. Designating it to do something, a purpose.


In Exodus 31:16, the word is translated " celebrate" God celebrated the Sabbath.

In first Kings 12:31, priests are created. This time it's translated as appointed.

Exodus 1:21, God created families, for midwives.

Did God make these people appear out of thin air for these midwives?

You see, to make, or to create, is commonly used in the Bible to mean "appoint" or "designate" etc.

Creating not materialistically, but creating for purposes and meaning. Appointing. Electing etc.

Like I said, you can read it as "elected" if you wish. But who made them?

 

[Job 33:6]

I'll try this, let's take a look at the word "Asah",

It's used interchangeably depending on the passage with bara. For example Exodus states that God Asah The heavens and the Earth.

But what does this word actually mean?

God created the Israelites. Does that mean that God made Israelites out of nothing? That's dueteronomy 32 6, Psalm 149:2, Hosea 8:14 etc.

God creates each day, that Psalm 118:24. What is that even mean?

God created The human spirit, Zechariah 12:1.

God created north and south, Psalm 89:12. What is that supposed to mean? How does someone create that? It's not a material object.

God made the moon to mark seasons, Psalm 104:19, that's not about material manufacturing, That's about making an object to do something. Designating it to do something, a purpose.


In Exodus 31:16, the word is translated " celebrate" God celebrated the Sabbath.

In first Kings 12:31, priests are created. This time it's translated as appointed.

Exodus 1:21, God created families, for midwives.

Did God make these people appear out of thin air for these midwives?

You see, to make, or to create, is commonly used in the Bible to mean "appoint" or "designate" etc.

Creating not materialistically, but creating for purposes and meaning. Appointing. Electing etc.

Given the above, let's look again.

Day 1, God doesn't actually make anything.

‭‭Genesis 1:3-5 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. [5] God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

He makes day and night. But are those actual objects? No.

Day 2:

‭‭Genesis 1:6-8 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.

Here God makes an empty space. It's not really a thing, it's just a space between the waters. It's not an actual object.

Day 3:

‭‭Genesis 1:9-13 ESV‬‬
[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. [11] And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. [12] The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. [13] And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

Again, God doesn't actually create anything here, the waters were gathered, that's not creation, the land was revealed after the water was gathered, the land was not created, it appeared after the removal of the water that was over top of it. Did God create the vegetation? No, the Earth brought it forth.


So when we think about the days of creation, we should not be thinking of scientific materialistic creation.

We should be thinking more along the lines of, creating in the sense of, making a company or making a football team. Not material creation, but rather a type of designation of purpose. If I make a football team, I don't make human beings appear out of nothing. Rather I'm assigning a purpose for people to fill.

Does that make sense?

So in God makes the Israelites, or God makes day and night. Or the expanse between the waters (this space is a sort) God isn't actually materialistically or scientifically manufacturing things.

 

[Job 33:6]

Like I said, you can read it as "elected" if you wish. But who made them?

God did. But the question really is, What is Genesis about?

Moses would very well have known that God materially manufactured the universe. Right. But that might not be the most important story to Moses. The more important story might be, when God chose to commune with mankind. When God chose to save us.

We can think about the same thing with Jesus, what's more important, that Jesus saves us? Or that Jesus manufactured our physical bodies?

The Bible isn't a science textbook. It's going to trend toward talking about salvation. Not science.

 

[Job 33:6]

Here are some other interesting instances of creation in the Bible.

God creates north and south, Psalm 89:12, God creates Israel, Isaiah 43:15, God creates darkness, Isaiah 45:7, God creates a blacksmith, Isaiah 54:16.

God creates a blacksmith???

Ok, sorry I just wanted to lay that out. Just to show that, when God creates something, we can't just rush to a conclusion that this a nat-geo special about the big bang. If you see what I'm trying to say.

I'll re-read your comments.

 

[Job 33:6]

So no, I do not think that Genesis talks about electing. Biblically, Genesis talks about making or fashioning.

Chapter 1 - God makes mankind in His likeness, male and female. God blesses mankind and tells them to be fruitful and multiply. Day 6 is done, God rests.
Chapter 2 - overlaps with chapter 1. It begins in day 6, God makes the man from the dust of the earth, whatever that means. There are no animals that can be a suitable companion for the man. God makes the woman from the man's side, whatever that means. At some later time, call it day 8, the man and the woman sin. God names the man Adam, which means "the first man". Adam names his wife Eve, which means "mother of living". They go on making babies, which is what God told them to do back on day 6 when He made them.

That's what it says.

And, I don't know if we've talked about this yet, but everyone in the old testament is made of dust. So that's not about material creation. And Eve is made from Adams side, with the caveat that it's in a prophetic vision (Adam enters a deep sleep right beforehand) so that's not about material creation either. And chapter 4 says that jubar and jabar are the fathers of all that play musical instruments and live in tents, but those aren't geneological biological concepts.

Animals are living and yet animals are not descendants of Eve. Jabal was the father of those who raise livestock and live in tents. Jubal, The father of all who play pipes.

These concepts are not about scientific biology or biological geneologies.

And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the breath returns to God who gave it.
Ecclesiastes 12:7

For he knows our frame. He remembers that we are dust.
Psalms 103:14

You hide your face, they are terrified. You take away their breath, they die and return to their dust.
Psalms 104:29

By the sweat of your brow you shall eat bread, until your return to the ground. For from it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”
Genesis 3:19

Remember that you fashioned me like clay; and will you turn me to dust again?
Job 10:9

Then Abraham answered and said, “Look, please, I was bold to speak to my Lord, but I am dust and ashes.
Genesis 18:27

Your descendants shall be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west, and to the east, and to the north and to the south. And all the families of the earth will be blessed through you and through your descendants.
Genesis 28:14

It's just not about science or material origins. The Bible doesn't cover these things.

The Bible doesn't speak as though it were written by a 21st century biology professor. Rather it's focus is theology. Election. Appointment. Salvation. Purpose and meaning etc

 

[olgamc]

Given the above, let's look again.

Day 1, God doesn't actually make anything.

‭‭Genesis 1:3-5 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. [5] God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

He makes day and night. But are those actual objects? No.

Light did not exist. Light is material by the way. Did not exist. God speaks. Light exists. How is that not creating? Then God separates light from darkness. How is that not fashioning?

Day 2:

‭‭Genesis 1:6-8 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.

Here God makes an empty space. It's not really a thing, it's just a space between the waters. It's not an actual object.

Air is made of oxygen, carbon dioxide, and a bunch of other gasses. Physical. The expanse between waters below (sea) and waters above (clouds) is air. Sky is air.

Day 3:

‭‭Genesis 1:9-13 ESV‬‬
[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. [11] And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. [12] The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. [13] And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

Again, God doesn't actually create anything here, the waters were gathered, that's not creation, the land was revealed after the water was gathered, the land was not created, it appeared after the removal of the water that was over top of it. Did God create the vegetation? No, the Earth brought it forth.

Fashioning or forming is creating. Like pottery.

So when we think about the days of creation, we should not be thinking of scientific materialistic creation.

Literally everything above is about physical material things.

We should be thinking more along the lines of, creating in the sense of, making a company or making a football team. Not material creation, but rather a type of designation of purpose. If I make a football team, I don't make human beings appear out of nothing. Rather I'm assigning a purpose for people to fill.

Does that make sense?

No. LOL You think that the material world created itself, and then God came in and said oh ok, I like that blue planet, let's assign it the purpose of housing people. Oh and guess what, there are people on it already, how convenient. ? Of course not!

So in God makes the Israelites, or God makes day and night. Or the expanse between the waters (this space is a sort) God isn't actually materialistically or scientifically manufacturing things.

Of course He is. God makes Abraham. Then He appoints him to be the father of the nations. Then He gives him a miracle son Isaac. Then He gives Isaac a son, Jacob. Jacob has a particular quality about him, from the time he was in the womb, he struggles with his brother. Jacob is a fighter (not in a warrior sense), he fights for what he values. That's a character trait, encoded into Jacob's dna. Esau on the other hand is willing to give up his most valuable thing - his birthright - for a bowl of stew. God creates Jacob with a certain character trait. Then God chooses Jacob to be Israel. This is absolutely a process of manufacturing, fashioning, making, molding, shaping, etc. And even though character traits are technically immaterial, they have to be supported by a material body with a certain dna encoding.

It's like God makes a soul, which is all of our immaterial attributes, and then makes a physical body that is just right for that soul.

God did. But the question really is, What is Genesis about?

Genesis is a greek word meaning "origin". The Hebrew word is "bereshit", meaning "in the beginning". It is history, not science and not theology.

Moses would very well have known that God materially manufactured the universe. Right. But that might not be the most important story to Moses. The more important story might be, when God chose to commune with mankind. When God chose to save us.

The most important story to Moses, as he was leading Israelites out of Egypt, was to remind them of their origins and their history, and who God is.

We can think about the same thing with Jesus, what's more important, that Jesus saves us? Or that Jesus manufactured our physical bodies?

Both are important. Our physical body is the temple of the holy spirit. Go figure.

The Bible isn't a science textbook. It's going to trend toward talking about salvation. Not science.

We've been through this before. Genesis is a historic record. And of course it has theological implications. You can't understand salvation if you don't understand sin. Genesis tells us where sin came from, what it is, how serious it is, and that we are all sinners.

 

[olgamc]

And, I don't know if we've talked about this yet, but everyone in the old testament is made of dust. So that's not about material creation.

But it is true that we are dust. We are just a bunch of elements - carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, etc. We die and we decompose into non-organic matter. That's what it means. We are made of inorganic elements, and when we die we return to inorganic elements.

And Eve is made from Adams side, with the caveat that it's in a prophetic vision (Adam enters a deep sleep right beforehand) so that's not about material creation either. And chapter 4 says that jubar and jabar are the fathers of all that play musical instruments and live in tents, but those aren't geneological biological concepts.

Both of those are assumptions. Bible doesn't actually say if Adam's sleep was prophetic. Not all sleeps are prophetic. Usually for prophetic sleeps it says something along the lines of "he had a dream" or "in his sleep he saw" or something like that, and it doesn't here. And how do you know whether or not God created (encoded) musical talent into Jubar's dna and it's been passed down all the way to our modern day musicians and worship leaders?

Animals are living and yet animals are not descendants of Eve.

Right! Animals are living and they are not descendants of Eve, so it has to be some other type of living. Look at what it says when God made Adam - Genesis 2:7 - "and the man became a living being.". Doesn't say that about animals. Only people are referred to as living beings. Does this perhaps have to do with us having an immortal spirit (aka soul)? And now Eve is going to be the mother of all the living.

It's just not about science or material origins. The Bible doesn't cover these things.

The Bible is a word of God. God can be correct about science, can He not? It's not a science textbook, correct, but it also doesn't have to be entirely about immaterial things. The whole point of the Bible is Jesus - immaterial God becoming a real breathing material man.

The Bible doesn't speak as though it were written by a 21st century biology professor. Rather it's focus is theology. Election. Appointment. Salvation. Purpose and meaning etc

The Bible is a word of God. God knows more about biology than a 21st century biology professor. Agree?

 

[olgamc]

It's just not about science or material origins. The Bible doesn't cover these things.

Ok, bottom line. Why is it so important to you that people evolved? Why do you not allow the thought that God created them starting with Adam and Eve?

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok, bottom line. Why is it so important to you that people evolved? Why do you not allow the thought that God created them starting with Adam and Eve?

Well, in ancient near east texts, and in the Bible, creation doesn't actually begin with 2 people.

Chapter 1 says that it started with humanity. Similar to other texts of the day.

I'm ok with some reference between chapter 1 and 2, but teledoths never introduce retellings of narratives. People seem to think that the entirety of chapter 2 is contained in day 6, but that doesn't make any sense to me. I think that chapter 2 tells a completely different creation story. Different order. Different characters. Parallels different ANE narratives for polemic.

Every time God creates living things I'm chapter 1 it never involves just 2. Let the fish swarm, the birds, the birds fly, the beast of the land etc. populations.

Here's another reason:
Creation doesn't begin until verse 3. I'm the beginning the earth was formless and void... Then [later in time] God began creating by saying "let there be light".

The story isn't actually about material origins of earth because earth was already there.

Then God reveals earth by moving back the waters.

And this is how it happens in many ancient texts. It's common.

And of course I have to say the obvious as well, I think that science also is accurate with its statements about the age of the earth and the fossil record and things like that as well.

So why would anyone believe in a 7-day old universe, where humanity appeared out of thin air on day 6, when many ancient texts have 7-day temple inauguration hymns and Genesis and the old testament consistently talk about heaven and earth being God's temple? The Bible doesn't hide the description of Adam and Eve as appointed priests.

So instead of viewing the narrative as a nat geo special or biology textbook, why not allow the text to simply be about the inauguration of God's temple, and the appointment of His priests? And about the purpose of humanity under Adam and Eves priestly headship?

And we've already talked about how the lottery involves randomness, but that doesn't contradict God's sovereignty and control over the lottery. We never actually identified a contradiction between evolution and the Bible or God's character.

Etc.

 

[Job 33:6]

But it is true that we are dust. We are just a bunch of elements - carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, etc. We die and we decompose into non-organic matter. That's what it means. We are made of inorganic elements, and when we die we return to inorganic elements.

Yea sure. And that doesn't actually say anything about whether or not I have evolved through generations. I still have a mother and father. So the same would logically hold true of Adam and Eve.

Both of those are assumptions. Bible doesn't actually say if Adam's sleep was prophetic. Not all sleeps are prophetic.

Well, there are many examples of it being prophetic. And that fits the bill quite well. Just a few chapters later in Genesis, Abraham goes into a deep sleep as well, and we know that to also involve visions. So, that's just how it is. Other forms of deep sleep typically involve imminent danger to the one sleeping. But Adam wasn't in danger in the garden under God's care.

Usually for prophetic sleeps it says something along the lines of "he had a dream" or "in his sleep he saw" or something like that, and it doesn't here.

Not so. Oftentimes it just says that they entered a deep sleep and that's all you get. We can go through the instances if you would like.

‭‭Daniel 10:7 ESV‬‬
[7] And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, for the men who were with me did not see the vision, but a great trembling fell upon them, and they fled to hide themselves. ‭, ‬‭‭Genesis 15:12 ESV‬‬
[12] As the sun was setting, Abram fell into a deep sleep, and a thick and dreadful darkness came over him.

Earlier it mentions visions at a different point in time, but as we can see, when it actually happens it just says, he fell into a deep sleep and that was it. It doesn't say "in his sleep he saw dreadful darkness".

‭‭Daniel 10:9-11 NIV‬‬
[9] Then I heard him speaking, and as I listened to him, I fell into a deep sleep, my face to the ground. [10] A hand touched me and set me trembling on my hands and knees. [11] He said, “Daniel, you who are highly esteemed, consider carefully the words I am about to speak to you, and stand up, for I have now been sent to you.” And when he said this to me, I stood up trembling.

Again, Daniel never says, in my dream or in my sleep I saw...

It just says that he fell into a deep sleep, and immediately after he talks about a hand touching him.

Again we know that these are visions because the text clarifies elsewhere, but the passage is related to deep sleep Don't actually have to say, that they are visions.

In the Old Testament, deep sleep is directly associated with these visions. That's just what it is.

And how do you know whether or not God created (encoded) musical talent into Jubar's dna and it's been passed down all the way to our modern day musicians and worship leaders?

??? Because the Bible isn't a science textbook.

Did God create special DNA for building tents too under father Jabar?

 

[Job 33:6]

Right! Animals are living and they are not descendants of Eve, so it has to be some other type of living. Look at what it says when God made Adam - Genesis 2:7 - "and the man became a living being.". Doesn't say that about animals. Only people are referred to as living beings. Does this perhaps have to do with us having an immortal spirit (aka soul)? And now Eve is going to be the mother of all the living.

It doesn't say that Eve will be mother of all living beings. But again, it's not about biological geneologies. Nobody is going around arguing that their DNA allows them to build tents better than other people.

Well my DNA allows me to build Patagonia tents faster than you!

No.

I would say, it's more important to speak of Eve as a motherly headship figure.

Growing up in my church, there was a woman there, everyone loved her. She gave the best hugs. She was smart, loving. She seemed perfect. And all the kids there, when their parents were divorced or left their kids or didn't care, at church, that woman was there. She was, not biologically, but rather functionally, our mother.

And that's what I would say the text is actually describing. It doesn't care about Eve being the only woman on planet earth, which contradicts everything we know about the context of Genesis 1. Rather it's talking about Eve as a mother, functionally, over God's chosen people in His holy space. It's a supernatural role, not a scientific description.

The Bible is a word of God. God can be correct about science, can He not? It's not a science textbook, correct, but it also doesn't have to be entirely about immaterial things. The whole point of the Bible is Jesus - immaterial God becoming a real breathing material man.

Moses doesn't have a science education. His culture, his thoughts, his interests and concerns. What matters to him and the isrealites, is not biology. You might care about biology in the 21st century for other reasons. But that's not Moses' concern. He's trying to get his people out of Egypt and he cares about God's love and justice etc.

The Bible is a word of God. God knows more about biology than a 21st century biology professor. Agree?

Yes, but God didn't write the Bible. Moses did in this case.

 

[Job 33:6]

The gospel of John: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made."

Genesis: "and God said let there be light, and there was light. ...and God said ... and God made ... God said ... God maid" over and over and over again.

Yes, and as I've noted, bara and Asah, in many cases, if not in every case, describe making with use of pre existing materials or describe creation of immaterial things. Like when God creates a blacksmith, or God creates Israel etc. That's not about material origins.

Also, John is something like 1,000 years later in time than Moses. His context and philosophy isn't the same as Moses. So his interests also do not align with Moses'. He could very well be speaking of a different kind of creation that God did, without contradicting Genesis.

I'm not saying that God didn't create the universe. What I'm saying is, that's not what Genesis is actually describing.

 

[Job 33:6]

So no, I do not think that Genesis talks about electing. Biblically, Genesis talks about making or fashioning.

Chapter 1 - God makes mankind in His likeness, male and female. God blesses mankind and tells them to be fruitful and multiply. Day 6 is done, God rests.
Chapter 2 - overlaps with chapter 1. It begins in day 6, God makes the man from the dust of the earth, whatever that means. There are no animals that can be a suitable companion for the man. God makes the woman from the man's side, whatever that means. At some later time, call it day 8, the man and the woman sin. God names the man Adam, which means "the first man". Adam names his wife Eve, which means "mother of living". They go on making babies, which is what God told them to do back on day 6 when He made them.

That's what it says.

Chapter 2 happens in 1 day.

‭‭Genesis 2:4 ESV‬‬
[4] These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, *in the day* that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

And ive said this before but God doesn't enter His temple and rest midway through chapter 2. In chapter 2 God is right there at the start.

When God rests in chapter 1, That's the grand finale. That's the most significant aspect of the text. That's why the seventh day is repeated three times, that's the highlight. It's when God is finished creating, and he enters his temple and begins his rulership.

You don't have priests before you have your temple. It's not clear why chapter 2 would mysteriously not mention this most important event of chapter 1.

Then we have all those other things we don't agree on. I don't think that the animals in Genesis 2 are made in a separate day.

I would say that these are just two separate texts. Genesis 1 parallels the Memphite theology, while chapter 2 parallels enuma Elish. Or something similar to this.

 

[Job 33:6]

Light did not exist. Light is material by the way. Did not exist. God speaks. Light exists. How is that not creating? Then God separates light from darkness. How is that not fashioning?

Fashioning is not manufacturing. Id agree with the second point. On the first, Moses isn't a physicist. He doesn't know about photons for example. The light here was fashioned, but the text says nothing of material origins.

Air is made of oxygen, carbon dioxide, and a bunch of other gasses. Physical. The expanse between waters below (sea) and waters above (clouds) is air. Sky is air.

Again, Moses isn't a climatologist. He's not thinking about air molecules and gasses. Moses doesn't have a periodic table. Water, air, earth, fire etc. that's his periodic table. Actually that's probably Greek.

But the point is, the expanse is not a physical thing. It's just an expanse. It doesn't say that God created the waters above and below either. that was there in verse 2 before God began creating. That's what the deep is.

Fashioning or forming is creating. Like pottery.

Sure.

Literally everything above is about physical material things.

There's nothing about where those things actually came from.

No. LOL You think that the material world created itself, and then God came in and said oh ok, I like that blue planet, let's assign it the purpose of housing people. Oh and guess what, there are people on it already, how convenient. ? Of course not!

Never said God didn't create it.

All you're doing is laughing at the Bible right now. This is how ancient texts are written, they begin with a dark deep ocean covering the earth.

And if you read Genesis, what do you see in first two? The spirit hovers over the face of the deep, the water's already there.

And then do you see Earth created, what does the Bible say? It says that God moved the water out of the way, he gathered it.

‭‭Proverbs 8:27 ESV‬‬
[27] When he established the heavens, I was there; when he drew a circle on the face of the deep,
[29] when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth,

‭‭Job 26:10 ESV‬‬
[10] He has inscribed a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness.
[12] By his power he stilled the sea; by his understanding he shattered Rahab. [13] By his wind the heavens were made fair; his hand pierced the fleeing serpent.

That's why job and Proverbs say these things.

He set up a boundary, he inscribed a circle on the waters. When he assigned the sea it's limit etc.

It's saying that the Earth was already there, and God basically pushed back these waters.

And that's why during Noah's flood, Genesis 7:11 and 8:2, what happens?

God stops restraining the waters and he allows them to re-enter creation. The windows of the sky open. The windows of the circle on the face of the deep, open up. The limit of the sea that God set up, is removed. God essentially just reverses creation and uncreated the earth. He returned to the Earth to its formless state.

And we know this with certainty, because the Genesis flood narrative, texts of chapter 9 directly parallel chapter 1. In many ways.

Just think about it. That's what the text is saying.

Of course He is. God makes Abraham. Then He appoints him to be the father of the nations. Then He gives him a miracle son Isaac. Then He gives Isaac a son, Jacob. Jacob has a particular quality about him, from the time he was in the womb, he struggles with his brother. Jacob is a fighter (not in a warrior sense), he fights for what he values. That's a character trait, encoded into Jacob's dna. Esau on the other hand is willing to give up his most valuable thing - his birthright - for a bowl of stew. God creates Jacob with a certain character trait. Then God chooses Jacob to be Israel. This is absolutely a process of manufacturing, fashioning, making, molding, shaping, etc. And even though character traits are technically immaterial, they have to be supported by a material body with a certain dna encoding.

Sure, But at the end of the day, Abraham and all these other people still have mothers, and they're made of dust.

So too is the case with Adam.

It's like God makes a soul, which is all of our immaterial attributes, and then makes a physical body that is just right for that soul.

Well Genesis 1 only mentions one creation of humanity, it doesn't talk about two. It doesn't say that God made the physical body, and then made the spirit. It only says that one creation of humanity happens. And it's the living nephesh, the living spirit. Something non-material.

Genesis is a greek word meaning "origin". The Hebrew word is "bereshit", meaning "in the beginning". It is history, not science and not theology.

Nope. The original text is not have the definite article there for beginning, it doesn't say "in the beginning" The way that you're thinking about it, really what it's saying is, in the beginning of God creating.

And I would recommend the NRSV or the NRSVUE translations to help clarify on this.

In the beginning when God began creating, or when God began creating.

The most important story to Moses, as he was leading Israelites out of Egypt, was to remind them of their origins and their history, and who God is.

Both are important. Our physical body is the temple of the holy spirit. Go figure.

We've been through this before. Genesis is a historic record. And of course it has theological implications. You can't understand salvation if you don't understand sin. Genesis tells us where sin came from, what it is, how serious it is, and that we are all sinners.

So this is a very long video, but actually the very first topic talks about the beginning three chapters of Genesis. It takes him about 20-25 minutes to cover the topic of material vs immaterial origins in verses 1-3. Id highly recommend it.

The formless earth, it was there before God began creating. That's just how all ancient near east texts start. That's a normal thing, Even if it sounds a little bit strange to us. That's how they wrote back then.

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok, bottom line. Why is it so important to you that people evolved? Why do you not allow the thought that God created them starting with Adam and Eve?

At the end of the day, the Bible through and through describes an ancient Near East context, and it doesn't have anything to do with science.

The formless earth being revealed by the gathering of the waters. The solid sky. The 7-day temple inaugurations. God resting on the 7th day.

These concepts appear in many ancient texts outside the Bible.

When God creates, He is revealing the dry land by pushing back the sea.

That's why Job says that God stilled the sea when He pierced Rahab, the fleeing serpent.

And these concepts are not scientific.

And because these concepts aren't scientific, I would say that it becomes unreasonable to then try to extrapolate the biblical text into scientific thought.


When I read about God's laying Leviathan during the creation of the cosmos, Psalm 74:14-16,
I don't then try to figure out where I can find a national geographic television show about God fighting a Hydra.

‭‭Psalms 74:14-17 NIV‬‬
[14] It was you who crushed the heads of Leviathan and gave it as food to the creatures of the desert. [15] It was you who opened up springs and streams; you dried up the ever-flowing rivers. [16] The day is yours, and yours also the night; you established the sun and moon. [17] It was you who set all the boundaries of the earth; you made both summer and winter.

Do you think that God fought a multi-headed sea dragon when he established the Sun and Moon? Or when he set the boundaries of the earth and created summer and winter?

No.

So why would you then turn to science and expect science to align with this

We've already talked about how Job has an ancient cosmology depicted, we see the exact same words in proverbs, we see the exact same words in Psalms.

We saw all the passages throughout the Old Testament about Sheol and the underworld, we don't think of that as scientific.

We've seen all the passages about Earth sitting on pillars in an ocean, we know that's not science, we see those passages and first and second Samuel, job and Proverbs as well.

The flood narrative parallels the book of Enoch and the Mesopotamian flood story through and through, I mean down to super specific detail. The context just isn't scientific, windows opening in the sky to release the ocean above.

We see that exact same ancient cosmology in Genesis or God removes the water to reveal dry land. The formless Earth under the waters was present before God even began creating.

These are all, along with many others, normal and common ancient Near East ideas.

And it's not science. So nobody should be then looking at all the world's astronomers and biologists and geologists and chemists and physicists, and saying that they're all wrong and that the Earth is actually flat or 6,000 years old or that evolution isn't true or that heliocentrism isn't true etc.

The Catholic church already went through this issue in the Middle ages when they put Galileo on house arrest and identified him as a heretic because he said that geocentrism isn't true.


The Bible just isn't a science textbook. The cultural context is not 21st century materialism.

I mean how much evidence does someone need to reach the obvious conclusion that the Bible doesn't describe scientific concepts?

Multi-headed fire breathing sea dragons?

I mean come on, anyone home???

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok, bottom line. Why is it so important to you that people evolved? Why do you not allow the thought that God created them starting with Adam and Eve?

And if you would like to, we can talk about science as well.

I'm well familiar with things like the fossil record for example.

But I just don't think that the Bible is giving a scientifically accurate perspective on things. Moses didn't know science and the text indicates a pre scientific perspective. Not that God doesn't know science, but rather that God allowed Moses to retain his ancient near east context while writing about theological issues.

Simply put, there's nothing in the Bible that actually indicates any sort of advanced scientific knowledge by Moses. So I don't think it makes sense to then turn and to treat his words as if they are scientific. I mean, he lived some 3,000 years ago. He didn't know science.

 

[olgamc]

At the end of the day, the Bible through and through describes an ancient Near East context, and it doesn't have anything to do with science.

The formless earth being revealed by the gathering of the waters. The solid sky. The 7-day temple inaugurations. God resting on the 7th day.

These concepts appear in many ancient texts outside the Bible.

When God creates, He is revealing the dry land by pushing back the sea.

That's why Job says that God stilled the sea when He pierced Rahab, the fleeing serpent.

And these concepts are not scientific.

And because these concepts aren't scientific, I would say that it becomes unreasonable to then try to extrapolate the biblical text into scientific thought.


When I read about God's laying Leviathan during the creation of the cosmos, Psalm 74:14-16,
I don't then try to figure out where I can find a national geographic television show about God fighting a Hydra.

‭‭Psalms 74:14-17 NIV‬‬
[14] It was you who crushed the heads of Leviathan and gave it as food to the creatures of the desert. [15] It was you who opened up springs and streams; you dried up the ever-flowing rivers. [16] The day is yours, and yours also the night; you established the sun and moon. [17] It was you who set all the boundaries of the earth; you made both summer and winter.

Do you think that God fought a multi-headed sea dragon when he established the Sun and Moon? Or when he set the boundaries of the earth and created summer and winter?

No.

So why would you then turn to science and expect science to align with this

We've already talked about how Job has an ancient cosmology depicted, we see the exact same words in proverbs, we see the exact same words in Psalms.

We saw all the passages throughout the Old Testament about Sheol and the underworld, we don't think of that as scientific.

We've seen all the passages about Earth sitting on pillars in an ocean, we know that's not science, we see those passages and first and second Samuel, job and Proverbs as well.

The flood narrative parallels the book of Enoch and the Mesopotamian flood story through and through, I mean down to super specific detail. The context just isn't scientific, windows opening in the sky to release the ocean above.

We see that exact same ancient cosmology in Genesis or God removes the water to reveal dry land. The formless Earth under the waters was present before God even began creating.

These are all, along with many others, normal and common ancient Near East ideas.

And it's not science. So nobody should be then looking at all the world's astronomers and biologists and geologists and chemists and physicists, and saying that they're all wrong and that the Earth is actually flat or 6,000 years old or that evolution isn't true or that heliocentrism isn't true etc.

The Catholic church already went through this issue in the Middle ages when they put Galileo on house arrest and identified him as a heretic because he said that geocentrism isn't true.


The Bible just isn't a science textbook. The cultural context is not 21st century materialism.

I mean how much evidence does someone need to reach the obvious conclusion that the Bible doesn't describe scientific concepts?

Multi-headed fire breathing sea dragons?

I mean come on, anyone home???

Well basically you summed it all up when you said that God didn’t write Genesis, Moses did. That’s the bottom line - you do not believe that Genesis was a divinely inspired historical record.

I do. As a result, I do not view it through a lense of cosmology. I don’t even see cosmology in it. In Job yes, but Job is an entirely different book written for a different purpose. And even in Job when God finally speaks, He is sarcastic about cosmology.

Genesis - no. It’s not a science textbook, but it is a historic account and as such it can be scientifically accurate. But not always because science does not account for miracles.

Scientifically, the wine that Jesus made was, I don’t know, like 3 years old? I don’t know how old is “good” wine. The guy that tasted it obviously observed aged grape juice. But the people saw it just appear from water instantly.

So if God could instantly make aged wine, why couldn’t God have instantly made a 4 billion year old earth? And I am not saying that He did, I am just saying that He could have. Or conversely why couldn’t God form earth over the period of 4 billion years and called it one day? He could have. Why couldn’t God have arranged carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen atoms into an organic human body of Adam? He could have. I am not saying did. Just saying He could have.

But why God could not have evolved mankind out of a primate - that is both a theological and a scientific discussion. And the short answer is, because evolution of something that is like God contradicts either science or theology, depending from which perspective you choose to describe it.

 

[olgamc]

Well basically you summed it all up when you said that God didn’t write Genesis, Moses did. That’s the bottom line - you do not believe that Genesis was a divinely inspired historical record.

I do. As a result, I do not view it through a lense of cosmology. I don’t even see cosmology in it. In Job yes, but Job is an entirely different book written for a different purpose. And even in Job when God finally speaks, He is sarcastic about cosmology.

Genesis - no. It’s not a science textbook, but it is a historic account and as such it can be scientifically accurate. But not always because science does not account for miracles.

Scientifically, the wine that Jesus made was, I don’t know, like 3 years old? I don’t know how old is “good” wine. The guy that tasted it obviously observed aged grape juice. But the people saw it just appear from water instantly.

So if God could instantly make aged wine, why couldn’t God have instantly made a 4 billion year old earth? And I am not saying that He did, I am just saying that He could have. Or conversely why couldn’t God form earth over the period of 4 billion years and called it one day? He could have. Why couldn’t God have arranged carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen atoms into an organic human body of Adam? He could have. I am not saying did. Just saying He could have.

But why God could not have evolved mankind out of a primate - that is both a theological and a scientific discussion. And the short answer is, because evolution of something that is like God contradicts either science or theology, depending from which perspective you choose to describe it.

Also, you keep saying that you and I and Abram had a mom and a dad, so Adam also had to have a mom and a dad. But Jesus didn’t have a dad (a human dad that is). And Adam was a pattern of Jesus. So why do you think that Adam had to necessarily have a human or physical mom and dad?