Do you believe in Creationism or Evolutionism?

[Job 33:6]

Interesting speculation.

But as we see in Gen 9 refutes the speculation you offer.

Actually, it doesn't.

Notice the statement for what happens after the world wide flood of Gen 7 in Gen 9.

And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. 3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 4 Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood

That's how all dietary prohibitions are written in the old testament. For example:

Deuteronomy 14:9-10 KJVAAE
A. [9] These ye shall eat, of all that are in the waters: all that have fins and scales shall ye eat:
B. [10] and whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye may not eat; it is unclean unto you.

Deuteronomy 14:11-12 KJVAAE
A. [11] Of all clean birds ye shall eat.
B. [12] But these are they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,

Or:

Deuteronomy 14:4, 7 KJVAAE
A. [4] These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, and the goat,
B. [7] Nevertheless these ye shall not eat, of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the cloven hoof; as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof; therefore they are unclean unto you.

When God says:
A. Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

B. 4 Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood

You have to additionally notice the associated prohibition. The people of Deuteronomy were already eating fish, ox, sheep, goats, birds etc. and when God says " you may eat" or "you shall eat", it's not as though they never ate these things before. It's just identifying the category of foods that they were already eating, as an introduction to the prohibition that follows (part B of the statement).

And with this understanding we see that the dietary prohibition in Genesis 9 is actually evidence for the fact that everyone was already eating meat at the time of the flood. Just as every other dietary prohibition in the old testament begins with identifying foods that people were already eating, so too does the prohibition in Genesis 9.

Additionally, "every moving thing" is not actually "every moving thing". For example:

Genesis 1:30 NASB1995
[30] and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so.

Or consider the ESV translation for clarity:

Genesis 1:30 ESV
[30] And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so.

There is a difference between beast of the earth, behema, and "every thing that moves/creeps", remes. Not all animals "creep". Which sounds strange to English readers. But in fact, these are independent categories of animals. Some animals creep, others dont. Every thing that creeps does not include every bird of the heavens for example, nor every beast of the earth.

So in Genesis 9, when it talks about everything that creeps, it's actually talking about a specific category of animal. Not actually every moving animal. Some scholars speculate that this may have been referring specifically to wild animals of the wilderness.

So

A. The prohibition suggests that these animals were already being eaten. But that people were not to consume them with their life blood (perhaps to avoid eating them alive or uncooked in some sense, or maybe it was related to attempts at preserving animals by keeping them alive while eating parts of them etc.).

And

B. This classification of animals isn't encompassing of all animals anyway.

Sometimes creeping animals are interpreted as things like snakes or burrowing animals. Rodents or wild animals.

While beasts of the earth are thought of more as things like livestock. And Genesis 9 is specifically about the former, not the latter.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Not a problem.

next.

Not a problem. Many "accounts" do that very thing.

Gen 2:4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created

John 17 "sanctify them in Thy Truth , Thy WORD is Truth" John 17:17.

Not "Thy Word is Myth" as some have imagined it.

Proverbs 30:5: "Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him"

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

Humanists will argue that "the word of the Lord is myth, not truth , not factually accurate. For accurate reliable facts turn to man, not god"

Nothing new under the sun, as they say

Genesis 2:4 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, (NRSV)

Genesis 2:4 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, (RSV)

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, (KJV)

Genesis 2:4 Αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς, ὅτε ἐγένετο, ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν (Septuagint)

Genesis 2:4 “This is the book of the generation of heaven and earth, when they were made, in the day in which the Lord God made the heaven and the earth” (English transition of the (Septuagint)

John 17:17. Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. (NRSV)

Jesus spoke these words to His Father. He does not explain what he meant by the words, “your word is truth.” We do know, however, that the concept of Genesis 6-8 being an accurate account of actual historical events dates back to 1961 when it was postulated by two men who had very little knowledge of the Bible and even less knowledge of the life and earth sciences.

The biodiversity that we have today in land animals would necessarily have been aboard the ark in order for us to have it today. This biodiversity is so immense that the ark as described in Genesis would have been only a tiny fraction of the required size. Then there are all the marine and fresh water animals that would have perished in such a flood—not to mention the 369,054 species of vascular plants (tracheophytes) and the 17,000 species of bryophytes—most of which that would have perished in such a flood. Did I mention the dinosaurs, mammoths, ground sloths, and saber toothed cats that died after they were saved by the ark. The early Fathers of the Church knew and wrote of the absurdity of interpreting Genesis 1-11 as though it was written as an historical narrative, but some very much more recent men have audaciously thought that they knew better and plunged many fundamentalist churches into a circus.

“Humanists will argue that 'the word of the Lord is myth, not truth , not factually accurate. For accurate reliable facts turn to man, not god.’”

Humanists will argue in their foolish imaginations any number of silly things, but the incontrovertible fact is that Genesis1-11 is written in a genre of literature that is not found anywhere else in the Bible. This genre of literature is found, however, in epic tales, sagas, myths, and legends. God is no fool! He gave us Genesis 1-11 in genre of literature that the original recipients of the book understood. Thousands of years later, and many ridiculously false notions and superstitions later, many persons without a Biblical and literary background have fallen prey to those false notions and superstitions.

 

[BobRyan]

NASB Gen 2:4 4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.

a. account of men and their descendants Genesis 5:1;
b. metaph. תּוֺלְדוֺת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ Genesis 2:4 literally begettings of heaven and earth

origin. (Account of the origin of Earth and all life on it)

Strong's H8435 - tôlḏôṯ​

Genesis 2:4 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, (NRSV)

Genesis 2:4 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, (RSV)

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, (KJV)

Genesis 2:4 Αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς, ὅτε ἐγένετο, ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν (Septuagint)

Genesis 2:4 “This is the book of the generation of heaven and earth, when they were made, in the day in which the Lord God made the heaven and the earth” (English transition of the (Septuagint)

John 17:17. Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. (NRSV)

Jesus spoke these words to His Father.

The Word of God is Truth not myth.

Notice what happens when the Jews of Christ's day attempt to play fast and loose with the Word of God in Mark 7.

6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:

‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’

8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

Notice that we have the same verse referenced as "The Commandment of God", "the Word of God", and 'Moses said"

He does not explain what he meant by the words, “your word is truth.”

Well Mark 7 provides help in that regard

Heb 3 helps us understand that it is the Holy Spirit when David is quoted in the Psalms.

Heb 3:
7 Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says,

“Today if you hear His voice,
8 Do not harden your hearts as when they provoked Me,
As in the day of trial in the wilderness,

We do know, however, that the concept of Genesis 6-8 being an accurate account of actual historical events dates back to 1961

dates back to the NT.

1 Tim 2: the very details of "the account" in the text of Gen 2 are being appealed to by the NT
13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

Dates back to Christ Himself as we see in Mark 7 and in..
Matt 19:
3 Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” 4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

Jesus appeals to the very details of Gen 2 and argues it as if Jews believe Genesis is true

7 They *said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?” 8 He *said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart

The Jews do not respond with "Genesis is not actually true" . Rather they take a rule found in the OT (Leviticus) to oppose the Bible fact Christ affirms.

The biodiversity that we have today in land animals would necessarily have been aboard the ark in order for us to have it today.

false

According to the Bible, Noah didn’t need to bring every species onto the Ark, but rather representative kinds—base-level family groupings (like the cat kind, dog kind, elephant kind). According to Answers In Genesis, there were only 6,744 individual animals (1,398 kinds) on the Ark to represent all air-breathing land animals. From these, variation and adaptation—not evolution—could easily account for the biodiversity we see today. So while evolutionists claim countless extinct species over eons, the reality is that today’s known living animals can be traced back to a smaller number of original kinds, preserved through the Flood, supporting the biblical account over evolutionary assumptions.

speciation happens over short period of time.

“Punctuated equilibrium is the idea that evolution occurs in spurts instead of following the slow, but steady path that Darwin suggested"

"Changing environmental conditions can cause strong selective pressure, often affecting a variety of critical ecological and life history traits (including species interactions and community structure). This can induce species to evolve rapidly, leading to genetic and phenotypic shifts in a matter of generations."

BTW - plants can survive a flood. Just FYI

 

[BobRyan]

But as we see in Gen 9 refutes the speculation you offer.
Notice the statement for what happens after the world wide flood of Gen 7 in Gen 9.

"And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. 3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 4 Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood

God compares conditions after the flood in Gen 9 with the Gen 1 condition where green plants were given. HE ADDs animals into the diet of mankind after the flood.

your speculation makes an "argument out of the void of what is not in the Text" in Gen 1 and then gets slam hammered by the statement in Gen 9 that refutes your suggestion.

Interesting speculation.

But as we see in Gen 9 refutes the speculation you offer.

Notice the statement for what happens after the world wide flood of Gen 7 in Gen 9.

And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. 3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 4 Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood

God compares conditions after the flood in Gen 9 with the Gen 1 condition where green plants were given. HE ADDs animals into the diet of mankind after the flood.

your speculation makes an "argument out of the void of what is not in the Text" in Gen 1 and then gets slam hammered by the statement in Gen 9 that refutes your suggestion.

3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

IT is an obvious comparison of the two different contexts.

Actually, it doesn't.


That's how all dietary prohibitions are written in the old testament.

Not true.

For example:

Deuteronomy 14:9-10 KJVAAE
A. [9] These ye shall eat, of all that are in the waters: all that have fins and scales shall ye eat:
B. [10] and whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye may not eat; it is unclean unto you.

That is not a comparison of anything.

Gen 9 is a comparison of two different contexts two different epocs. One in Gen 1 and another at the Gen 9 post flood event
This is irrefutable

Deuteronomy 14:11-12 KJVAAE
A. [11] Of all clean birds ye shall eat.
B. [12] But these are they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,

Again, not a comparison of two different events/times/epochs.

The text of Deut 14 does not say Of all clean ye shall eat unlike some other time. There is no comparison in the text to some prior time..

The problem with your suggestion is that Gen 9 clearly states the restricted case in Gen 1 that you are trying to edit "out of the void" of what is not in Gen 1. It then explicitly introduces the change.

When God says:
A. Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

B. 4 Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood

You have to additionally notice the associated prohibition.

Gen 9 does not say "I gave you all animals to eat but now I restrict you from eating blood with the animals that I said you could eat".
Nor does it say "I gave you all animals to eat for food Gen 1 but now I am giving you all animals to eat for food"

We cannot imagine the text saying something it does not say.

You are engaging in creative writing at that point merely because believing in evolutionism requires death, predation, desease etc for its mythical mechanism it euphemistically calls "creation"

The people of Deuteronomy were already eating fish, ox, sheep, goats, birds etc. and when God says " you may eat" or "you shall eat"

Lev 11 has the restriction on which animals are clean vs unclean.
Lev 17 has the restriction against eating blood.

Leviticus is written 40 years before Deuteronomy and Deuteronomy contains no new restriction or new approval for diet over Leviticus written 40 years prior.

And with this understanding we see that the dietary prohibition in Genesis 9 is actually evidence for the fact that everyone was already eating meat at the time of the flood.

The text of Gen 9 does not say "continue eating animals" and does not say 'as you have been eating animals"

Rather it compares the "only plants" situation explicitly in Gen 1 to the new case of eating animals in Gen 9

 

[Job 33:6]

3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

IT is an obvious comparison of the two different contexts.

And? Again, giving plants is not equivalent to not giving animals.

Not true.

It is true, as demonstrated in the passages provided. Dietary prohibitions begin with that which was already permitted and follow with the prohibition.

That is not a comparison of anything.

Gen 9 is a comparison of two different contexts two different epocs. One in Gen 1 and another at the Gen 9 post flood event
This is irrefutable

Again, not a comparison of two different events/times/epochs.

The text of Deut 14 does not say Of all clean ye shall eat unlike some other time. There is no comparison in the text to some prior time..

The problem with your suggestion is that Gen 9 clearly states the restricted case in Gen 1 that you are trying to edit "out of the void" of what is not in Gen 1. It then explicitly introduces the change.

You're ignoring the syntax of prohibitive dietary laws. And it's not about one prohibition being in Genesis and another being in Deuteronomy. Both books were written by the same author (traditionally understood to be Moses) and to the same audience (Hebrew speaking Israelites).

Gen 9 does not say "I gave you all animals to eat but now I restrict you from eating blood with the animals that I said you could eat".
Nor does it say "I gave you all animals to eat for food Gen 1 but now I am giving you all animals to eat for food"

We cannot imagine the text saying something it does not say.

You are engaging in creative writing at that point merely because believing in evolutionism requires death, predation, desease etc for its mythical mechanism it euphemistically calls "creation"

You're ignoring the syntax of prohibitive dietary laws. The point is that, just like every other dietary prohibition in the pentateuch, it begins with that which was already consumed, and follows with the prohibition

Lev 11 has the restriction on which animals are clean vs unclean.
Lev 17 has the restriction against eating blood.

Leviticus is written 40 years before Deuteronomy and Deuteronomy contains no new restriction or new approval for diet over Leviticus written 40 years prior.

And? Dietary prohibitions of Leviticus follow the same syntax:

That which people were already eating:

Leviticus 11:3-4 ESV
[3] Whatever parts the hoof and is cloven-footed and chews the cud, among the animals, you may eat.

That which is prohibited:

B. [4] Nevertheless, among those that chew the cud or part the hoof, you shall not eat these: The camel, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is unclean to you.

And Genesis 9:3-4 follows the same syntax. That's why the statement regarding animals with lifeblood immediately follows animals given for consumption.

The point being that these prohibitions begin with that which was already permitted and already being consumed, and follow with that which is prohibited.

The text of Gen 9 does not say "continue eating animals" and does not say 'as you have been eating animals"

Neither do the various dietary laws of Deuteronomy.

Example:
Deuteronomy 14:4, 7, 9 ESV
[4] These are the animals you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat,
[7] Yet of those that chew the cud or have the hoof cloven you shall not eat these: the camel, the hare, and the rock badger, because they chew the cud but do not part the hoof, are unclean for you.
[9] “Of all that are in the waters you may eat these: whatever has fins and scales you may eat.

But the fact of the matter is, people were already eating ox, sheep, and goat.

Again, dietary prohibitions begin with that which is already permitted for consumption, and follow with the prohibition.

And I'm sorry if you've spent your entire life thinking that lions (after the fall) were eating vegetables in the ark. But sometimes you just have to accept what the Bible says.

Rather it compares the "only plants" situation explicitly in Gen 1 to the new case of eating animals in Gen 9

And I see a lack of response to behemah vs remes as well.

Your response does nothing to address these details.

 

[Job 33:6]

3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

IT is an obvious comparison of the two different contexts.

Not true.

That is not a comparison of anything.

Gen 9 is a comparison of two different contexts two different epocs. One in Gen 1 and another at the Gen 9 post flood event
This is irrefutable

Again, not a comparison of two different events/times/epochs.

The text of Deut 14 does not say Of all clean ye shall eat unlike some other time. There is no comparison in the text to some prior time..

The problem with your suggestion is that Gen 9 clearly states the restricted case in Gen 1 that you are trying to edit "out of the void" of what is not in Gen 1. It then explicitly introduces the change.

Gen 9 does not say "I gave you all animals to eat but now I restrict you from eating blood with the animals that I said you could eat".
Nor does it say "I gave you all animals to eat for food Gen 1 but now I am giving you all animals to eat for food"

We cannot imagine the text saying something it does not say.

You are engaging in creative writing at that point merely because believing in evolutionism requires death, predation, desease etc for its mythical mechanism it euphemistically calls "creation"

Lev 11 has the restriction on which animals are clean vs unclean.
Lev 17 has the restriction against eating blood.

Leviticus is written 40 years before Deuteronomy and Deuteronomy contains no new restriction or new approval for diet over Leviticus written 40 years prior.

The text of Gen 9 does not say "continue eating animals" and does not say 'as you have been eating animals"

Rather it compares the "only plants" situation explicitly in Gen 1 to the new case of eating animals in Gen 9

I'm going to point out another issue with your position.

Genesis 9:3 NASB2020
[3] Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I have given everything to you, as I gave the green plant.

Many translations don't actually include a temporal split between plants and animals here. For example, NASB2020 states, "I have given everything to you", past tense. It already happened. As I give the green plants. It's just a simile or comparison between animals and plants, not a sequence, animals then later plants.

In Hebrew, the text isn't actually written as a sequential timeline. Some translations make that interpretive call, others don't. But at the end of the day, you can't really base an argument off of something the Bible doesn't actually say in its original Hebrew.

It's like saying, "I have given you the baseball, just as I gave you the catchers mitt".

It's not saying "I am now giving you the baseball, just as I gave you the catchers mitt"

And this argument stands independently of my other ones based on Hebrew syntax of dietary prohibitions, and my other argument that 9:3 is specific to remes, or crawling things, and isn't a word that is all encompassing of all animals anyway.

So there are multiple issues with the "vegetarian lions on the ark" argument. Aside from the basic issue that the ark was post-fall anyway, and thus would be post-predation.

And then further, Psalm 104 talks about God providing lions their prey, and that's described as beautiful.